Green Line Derailment

[trainman8119]

Looks like the lead car may have picked a switch at the junction. The sineage looks green, which would indicate an Ashland bound train, which I would think should have been making the turn there. Looks like maybe the front wheels continued south, and by the time the operator realized it, he (she) was in the soup. Lucky that front car didn't leave the elevated structure. I would have to think also that speed was involved here, since the reaction time looks slow.

Also have to love the CTA response. The spokesperson says the following in the Sun-Times...

Rodriguez said a four-car train was involved in the derailment, and she believed only one car had left off the track

There was obviously more than one car off the track, and if she didn't know, then she shouldn't have volunteered the information.

[jajuan]

I just got through watching news coverage of a derailment on the southern end of the Green Line. Apparently at the junction where the 63/Ashland branch splits from the the East 63rd branch, the second car of a southbound East 63rd train starting to roll onto the Ashland branch curve, pulling the train of the tracks. According to news reports, few were seriously injured which is good. Service is now disrupted between 35th and 63rd while crews work to get the train back on the track and removed from the area. From the way the accident happened, it appears to be a possible switching error.

[Guest]

Looks like the lead car may have picked a switch at the junction. The sineage looks green, which would indicate an Ashland bound train, which I would think should have been making the turn there. Looks like maybe the front wheels continued south, and by the time the operator realized it, he (she) was in the soup. Lucky that front car didn't leave the elevated structure. I would have to think also that speed was involved here, since the reaction time looks slow.

Also have to love the CTA response. The spokesperson says the following in the Sun-Times...

There was obviously more than one car off the track, and if she didn't know, then she shouldn't have volunteered the information.

Cars #2479/2480 were the units that derailed. Whats unbelievable about this accident is that the cars trucks rest on three of the four tracks. Plus the security chains between the cars are stretched to its limit. Looks like my guys were ready with emergency equipment, obviously somebody really screwed up here! Thankfully the none of the cars left the structure. But also one cant help to think when another accident such as this will happen as they happen frequently.

[Northsider]

Just heard about his...thankfully not many were seriously injured

[jajuan]

Well the derailment got a brief mention on ABC World News stating that the train operator was in error and the afternoon editions of ABC7 News have been reporting in more detail that investigators have initially determined that the operator was in error. The train in question has been confirmed to have been a southbound East 63rd train to Cottage Grove. The reports say that the signal was apparently red at the time because the switch was still positioned to lead a train in the Englewood direction. They say that the fail safe to keep the train from going in the wrong direction was activated and stopped the train just short of the junction, but the operator overrode that fail safe and proceeded to move the train forward thus leading to the accident. There are a couple of witnesses who say that the operator apparently knew he screwed up because according to them he left the cab to alert them that something was wrong just before the second car diverted onto the Ashland curve. They stated that he did this WHILE THE TRAIN WAS STILL IN MOTION!!! I sincerely hope that that part of the story is not true. But either way, this guy has already been made the fall guy when initially there was some question of whether some current work on the switches at that junction may have been a factor because it was reminiscent of the Orange Line derailment of December 2006 that occurred at the junction formerly used by Howard trains when that line was still operating as the Howard-Englewood/Jackson Park. That part of it is a shame because he's a 31 year veteran with a clean safety record for at least the past four years.

[qwantae]

Those train were 2475-76 and 2479-80, I've been took a close look at them on the news several times.

[trainman8119]

Unfortunately, they will always blame the employee first without question. The funny thing, though, is that 99 99/100 % of the time, it is not mechanical...the stuff just doesn't screw up. The only beef I have is that they go public with quick blame without any real investigation. I will wait for, what I think is almost certain here, an report from the NTSB. Like I said, I am sure that this guy was going a little quick, not necessarily speeding, but quick to get that far out of whack without stopping...also there had to be quite a jolt to break up the married pair...this is not a simple coupling that broke apart.

[jajuan]

Unfortunately, they will always blame the employee first without question. The funny thing, though, is that 99 99/100 % of the time, it is not mechanical...the stuff just doesn't screw up. The only beef I have is that they go public with quick blame without any real investigation. I will wait for, what I think is almost certain here, an report from the NTSB. Like I said, I am sure that this guy was going a little quick, not necessarily speeding, but quick to get that far out of whack without stopping...also there had to be quite a jolt to break up the married pair...this is not a simple coupling that broke apart.

I'll agree with on that point. There had to be some speed involved to snap that circular beam connecting that married pair. That second car had move that curve with a considerable enough speed to produce the force to break that connecting beam.

[Busjack]

Agreeing in with jajuan, it looked from the Tribune pictures like the first car was going to Jackson Park and the second to Englewood, and that doesn't work. While from the Tribune pictures it looked like the signs were green, I just looked at a closeup on TV and they were the green on white East 63rd signs.

Channel 5 agreed with jajuan's scenario that the red light stopped the train, the motorman started again, the trip stopped the train, but the motorman went out and reset the trip. They also said that the motorman was a CTA employee for 31 years, which reminded me, that is almost exactly the time since the 1977 wreck when the Lake-Dan Ryan motorman pushed the train against a Ravenswood, and pushed the L-DR train off the L structure at Wabash and Lake (2/4/77).

The question is, for any of you that work on the L: why would the motorman ignore the two stops and reset the trip, instead of radioing control and asking why the switch wasn't clear?

[trainman8119]

The question is, for any of you that work on the L: why would the motorman ignore the two stops and reset the trip, instead of radioing control and asking why the switch wasn't clear?

My quess is that there is procedure that allows it. Even though Huberman is on his soap box, I'd be willing to bet that practice is allowed to a point and is done quite often. After the collision between that Ravenswood and Evanston trains a couple of years ago showed that operators can overrun the safety systems and that it is allowed to a point. CTA did institute a stricter policy after that one. There are things our engineers can do to reset trips and cut out safety appliances. The more safety sensitive the device the more likely approval is needed. I'd be willing to bet this guy screwed up, but I am also willing to bet that he wasn't that far off SOP.

[jajuan]

Well WGN Morning News has been airing video all morning that a rider reportedly captured using his laptop from inside what appears to be the second car of that derailed train given its position in relation to the first car that sat precariously across the tracks. They also showed another one of the riders from the train describing a loud snap. He described it a bit inaccurately as the coupler snapping apart when we know that the cars in questions cannot be separated under normal circumstances. Even though there are no reports that it's happened yet, given the shot nerves of those involved, but I'm sure there are going to be some lawsuits filed. The quick rush to place the blame totally on the operator along with the reports of his apparent ignoring of the red signal at the switch and his resetting of the emergency brake that stopped him at the signal is the ammo some personal injury lawyer needs to get these folks in line to sue. Not that there shouldn't be some accountability for what happened, but this rush lay blame and say what happened without a thorough investigation of the circumstances only helps fuel the fire that gets some of the more unethical elements among the legal profession started. I'm sure there are plenty of them chomping at the bit to get to one of these justifiably frightened souls.

[Zol87]

Aren't the track switches computer controlled and determined by the destination sign on the incoming train?

Also, I'm glad that no one was killed in the incident. But I think that the Operator should have waited before proceeding into the junction.

[Busjack]

Even though there are no reports that it's happened yet, given the shot nerves of those involved, but I'm sure there are going to be some lawsuits filed. The quick rush to place the blame totally on the operator along with the reports of his apparent ignoring of the red signal at the switch and his resetting of the emergency brake that stopped him at the signal is the ammo some personal injury lawyer needs to get these folks in line to sue. Not that there shouldn't be some accountability for what happened, but this rush lay blame and say what happened without a thorough investigation of the circumstances only helps fuel the fire that gets some of the more unethical elements among the legal profession started. I'm sure there are plenty of them chomping at the bit to get to one of these justifiably frightened souls.

In this case, your view of the legal profession is a bit harsh.

Huberman did say what the CTA's initial findings were, but, like the subway derailment incident, I'm sure there will be a full NTSB investigation. Also, Huberman's statements would quickly be taken as an admission against interest by the CTA.

There is the ever present requirement that to sue, one has to file a notice of claim with the CTA (70 ILCS 3605/41), which is enforced even though in this case, CTA knows where and when the accident occurred. Thus, any suits will be announced within 6 months.

Also, if the media reports about the accident are anywhere near accurate, there was more than mere negligence (the operator intentionally or recklessly bypassing the safety equipment), so establishing the CTA's liability wouldn't be difficult.

The real question is whether any persons wanting to buy a lawsuit climbed the the structure, which is what was reported with regard to an accident around 40th Street. With a car hanging over a gap in the structure past the junction, I would hope not.

[Busjack]

Aren't the track switches computer controlled and determined by the destination sign on the incoming train?

Also, I'm glad that no one was killed in the incident. But I think that the Operator should have waited before proceeding into the junction.

The destination sign doesn't, but there are other devices, such as radio signal coils mounted on the cars that were supposed to give the info to the switch.

Also, at one point, the switch assumed that alternate trains went each way. There also was a tower at the yard.

However, my information (from Krambles's book) predates when the Green Line was redone in 1996 and the signals were updated.

Again, anyone working on the L who has the current info?

[Guest]

If the accident was the responsibilty of the train operator Im not surprised. In ther many years Ive been involved with CTA, one thing Ive definitely noticed, you have lots of hot doggers, operators that like to show off because they feel they have time on the job and no one can tell them what to do. Some operators like to make their own rules. They think they know what theyre doing when they dont! Ive seen many showoffs at CTA, some of these operators involved in accidents because they operate in a cocky and unsafe manner. We all see occasionally some bus operators drivng unsafe, running red lights and doing other unsafe moves. I feel some are showing off, I think we see some of this in this accident. The operator ran a red signal, obviously the train operator wasant paying attention to his job, probably gabbing on his cell phone or in some cases reading a newspaper while the train is moving. If he willingly walked off the train and refused medical treatment then we know he didnt have a seizure or any other medical condition. I believe the operator was just plain reckless, either showing off or just wasant paying attention to his job. Whatever the case may be he was suppose to be in control of that train and if he did follow standard operating procedure then that train shouldnt have derailed for any reason. Clearly he did not operate his train safely, he jeopardized the safety of every person on that train. Im just thankful the accident wasant much worse.

[jajuan]

In this case, your view of the legal profession is a bit harsh.

Huberman did say what the CTA's initial findings were, but, like the subway derailment incident, I'm sure there will be a full NTSB investigation. Also, Huberman's statements would quickly be taken as an admission against interest by the CTA.

There is the ever present requirement that to sue, one has to file a notice of claim with the CTA (70 ILCS 3605/41), which is enforced even though in this case, CTA knows where and when the accident occurred. Thus, any suits will be announced within 6 months.

Also, if the media reports about the accident are anywhere near accurate, there was more than mere negligence (the operator intentionally or recklessly bypassing the safety equipment), so establishing the CTA's liability wouldn't be difficult.

The real question is whether any persons wanting to buy a lawsuit climbed the the structure, which is what was reported with regard to an accident around 40th Street. With a car hanging over a gap in the structure past the junction, I would hope not.

Maybe I was a bit harsh, but I want to mention that I was not referring to the legal profession as a whole. It was basically the cynic in me tallking. I'm just trying to wrap my mind around the operator first ignoring the red stop signal and then resetting the emergency brake and proceeding forward after the emergency brake was tripped because of the red signal. His 31 years of service and clean safety record for the previous four just isn't jibing with his not checking with control or someone in charge to double check why the emergency brake was tripped. That part totally doesn't make any sense to me and it's frustrating the heck out of me.

[trainman8119]

What is really eating at me here is the constant statement that the operator "ran the red signal". According to those on the train, he first stopped....then proceeded by it, activating the safety stop device, at which time he then overrode it. It is obvious that at least the front (and possibly the entire first car) made it over the first switch, then the switch, for whatever reason threw, sending the second car towards Englewood. That is why I made my observation that there may be some sort of procedure, either current or at one time, that enabled the operator to override the stop. I realize after the Cabrini Green accident, more emphasis was put on contacting downtown for verbal permission. We still have not heard a definite statement if this was attempted or not. Again, this guy probably screwed up, to a point. But there is much, much more here than meets the eye, and I wish Huberman was not so much in a rush to make the comments he did when he did. It is hard for me to listen to a guy who has never operated a train or drove a bus to stand up and throw blame without much to back up his statements. It may turn out he was right, but his manner of approach is all wrong.

[Busjack]

The operator ran a red signal, obviously the train operator wasant paying attention to his job, probably gabbing on his cell phone or in some cases reading a newspaper while the train is moving.

What is really eating at me here is the constant statement that the operator "ran the red signal". According to those on the train, he first stopped....then proceeded by it, activating the safety stop device, at which time he then overrode it. It is obvious that at least the front (and possibly the entire first car) made it over the first switch, then the switch, for whatever reason threw, sending the second car towards Englewood. That is why I made my observation that there may be some sort of procedure, either current or at one time, that enabled the operator to override the stop.

For whatever the Tribune is worth:

• This wasn't just "running a red light." There was admittedly restarting after the track trip had enforced an emergency stop. Other reports also gave the impression that the red light had also enforced a stop. That would tend to support trainman's position on that point.
  
• However, the Tribune does indicate that there was a protocol--if the switch wasn't set in the correct position, call the control center and get permission to reset it--not override the track trip and full steam ahead.
  

As reported everywhere yesterday, the NTSB is investigating.

Another question--if the operator had a clear record for the last 4 of his 31 year employment, does that mean that he had other violations during the preceding 28 years?

[BusHunter]

It would seem to me what happened at the Green line was that the operator approached the junction, had an emergency trip, reset it and proceded. If that's what happened wouldn't he be forgetting the most important thing, which is to reset the signal. From the looks of his train he never did that. That's why his train went in all directions. With his destination being East 63rd, the switch points were never in his favor because the signals were red over red which essentially means stop and stay. If the switch did switch after the first set of wheels past the junction, it's sending the train the wrong way. This convinces me he never had control of the junction. That's why he would run out of the motorcab because he knows it's too late, he's forgotten about the signal. The question is why would he do this. Maybe fatigue or a failure to pay attention to his job. He should know what he's doing after 31 years on the job. It was just a mistake or boo boo. But it was a big one. In this case the emergency trip saved those people's lives because if he would have rolled through there at full speed that train would've been on the ground. Thank goodness for technology.

[trainman8119]

However, the Tribune does indicate that there was a protocol--if the switch wasn't set in the correct position, call the control center and get permission to reset it--not override the track trip and full steam ahead.

My point exactly. The front wheels went towards Jackson Park, so, in theory, he had the correct line-up and proceeded. It appears as the switch went over after, at least, the front wheels of the first car, maybe even the entire first car altogether, went by. The trip was the stop indication in the cab, after going by the red signal, which he overrode and proceeded. Apparently he didn't have control of the interlocking, and who knows if he ever should have.

As reported everywhere yesterday, the NTSB is investigating.

Another question--if the operator had a clear record for the last 4 of his 31 year employment, does that mean that he had other violations during the preceding 28 years?

Yes, the NTSB is taking a look, and that is good. I will wait to see their report in 6 months or so. My bet is there is a procedure here not being mentioned and overlooked. I will look forward to reading the publication.

As for the preceeding 27 years, I am sure there might be some minor stuff. However, I would think what is being noted is stuff that is easy access without too much digging through historical records.

[Busjack]

My point exactly. The front wheels went towards Jackson Park, so, in theory, he had the correct line-up and proceeded. It appears as the switch went over after, at least, the front wheels of the first car, maybe even the entire first car altogether, went by. The trip was the stop indication in the cab, after going by the red signal, which he overrode and proceeded. Apparently he didn't have control of the interlocking, and who knows if he ever should have.

Which raises the possibility that a northbound Englewood train (to put it most succinctly) obtained control of the interlocking. If that were the case, thankfully there wasn't a collision, too.

[Guest]

For whatever the Tribune is worth:

• This wasn't just "running a red light." There was admittedly restarting after the track trip had enforced an emergency stop. Other reports also gave the impression that the red light had also enforced a stop. That would tend to support trainman's position on that point.
  
• However, the Tribune does indicate that there was a protocol--if the switch wasn't set in the correct position, call the control center and get permission to reset it--not override the track trip and full steam ahead.
  

As reported everywhere yesterday, the NTSB is investigating.

Another question--if the operator had a clear record for the last 4 of his 31 year employment, does that mean that he had other violations during the preceding 28 years?

Depending on the type of incident it stays on your record for one year then it is erased but a record of it is still kept else where in the operating station.

[qwantae]

I've watched the WGN News this morning showing that its been a Red Line Derailment by 93rd Street this early Morning like around 5AM, but they didnt have more details about it yet. Does anyone else know any infomation about this? Its getting pretty scary on the trains.

[jajuan]

I've watched the WGN News this morning showing that its been a Red Line Derailment by 93rd Street this early Morning like around 5AM, but they didnt have more details about it yet. Does anyone else know any infomation about this? Its getting pretty scary on the trains.

Yes, a Securitas agent at the Addison Brown Line station was mentioning to my friend and me after he said that he was a little scared to ride the trains now since the derailment on the Green Line last week. My thoughts were why would she mention this after my friend already said that he's been scared to ride the trains now because of the other derailment, and why haven't evening editions of the news given any mention of this. The agent's mention of it was the first that I had heard of it today. I had to work to early this morning to se the morning news and neither the 4, 5 or 6 o'clock editions of ABC7 News mentioned much about it. I understand that today was a historic and important day in presidential politics but this is an important local story that should have gotten more mention than it did.

[Busjack]

It was mentioned in the Tues. morning news; apparently it happened with a nearly empty train backing up at 95th at about 2 am. There was also a derailment in the Howard Yard about the same time as the Green Line one. Apparently these are no longer a big deal if no service disruption.

One of many links.