2nd derailment at 59th Junction (Green Line)

[BusHunter]

A few questions about the derailment on Saturday. Why does it appear the train is traveling to Ashland/63rd instead of to the loop? It was on the outbound tracks (except the for the last car that derailed) and it's roll sign says Ashland/63rd. (There's a picture on the yahoo forums) The media and others say the train was inbound to the loop. So what's the destination? The reason I ask is that a witness said the train backed up before derailing. Is it possible they backed into the switch which switched after the train passed to now be switched to east 63rd? Also I couldn't help but notice #2424 the last car was the one that derailed. Since when was that car along with #2423 a work motor car? I remember all the work cars were put in place and a last 2 car set was put in place some months after the rest, but I thought those were #2421-22. Update I found out there was a single track in effect that day with operating personnel on each end of the train. There publicly saying it was operator error.

[Busjack]

CTA Tattler had a reference to this Channel 2.1 report. I thought that there had to be a key in the control to determine which one was active, and that only one could be. Apparently, that wasn't the case.

It always seems that when there is a new scenario, someone finds a way to mess up. In retrospect, I'm surprised that there were not any accidents when the Dan Ryan portion of the Red Line was being reconstructed and there was one track operation on various segments.

Also, my inference from reading the Chicago Breaking News account is that the two accounts seem to differ on who was at fault (the front or the back operator).

[trainman8119]

Also, my inference from reading the Chicago Breaking News account is that the two accounts seem to differ on who was at fault (the front or the back operator).

I had heard on WGN radio last night that 4 people were suspended w/o pay as a result of the accident. Why it is 4, I don't know.

[Busjack]

I had heard on WGN radio last night that 4 people were suspended w/o pay as a result of the accident. Why it is 4, I don't know.

The Channel 2 report said " the two motormen aboard the derailed train, a supervisor and a worker who was in a control tower at the time." I guess that is all of those having some proximate contact with the incident.

What probably is the better question, which I posed in response to a CTA Tattler post about "institutional knowledge" is that this sort of "human error" has been going on as long as CTA has had cab signals, now going through its second generation of them. While none of the subsequent accidents has been as deadly as the first wreck at Lake and Wabash, they keep happening, and as noted with regard to this one, at the same location. One would think that the signal systems could be made more fool-proof, but given that the completely automated system on the WMATA also led to a crash, I guess not completely so.

In any event, I have contended, since the 1977 accident, that a red signal should mean "stop," not "stop and then you can (in the sense of are physically able to) proceed at 15 mph." Maybe someone with L experience can explain the rationale for that.

[trainman8119]

The Channel 2 report said " the two motormen aboard the derailed train, a supervisor and a worker who was in a control tower at the time." I guess that is all of those having some proximate contact with the incident.

In any event, I have contended, since the 1977 accident, that a red signal should mean "stop," not "stop and then you can (in the sense of are physically able to) proceed at 15 mph." Maybe someone with L experience can explain the rationale for that.

From today's Tribune

Investigators determined that the train operator disobeyed a "stop" signal and caused the derailment by driving the train over a track switch that was not aligned for the train to pass safely, said CTA sources close to the investigation. After the first car derailed, the train operator in the sixth car powered up the train and pulled it back in the other direction, apparently in a bid to fix the problem, investigators said.

The train operators in front and back, a supervisor overseeing the shuttle operation and a control-tower employee were removed from service pending the outcome of the investigation, Gaffney said.

I can't speak for CTA rules, but in regular rail rules, there are situations when you can pass a red. In the case of an "absolute signal" which is usually at an interlocking or intersection, you can only proceed with permission of the dispatcher. In any scenario, when passing a red, the first thing to look for are any misaligned switches. Apparently this part was overlooked here. Since the tower operator was removed, makes me wonder if a switch was thrown while the train was progressing into the junction. I also wonder if the supervisor told the crew to back up, which would have called for his/her removal from service.

[Busjack]

Since the tower operator was removed, makes me wonder if a switch was thrown while the train was progressing into the junction.

Might be the connection between the two incidents at the same spot, although that wasn't obvious before.

[BusHunter]

From today's Tribune

I can't speak for CTA rules, but in regular rail rules, there are situations when you can pass a red. In the case of an "absolute signal" which is usually at an interlocking or intersection, you can only proceed with permission of the dispatcher. In any scenario, when passing a red, the first thing to look for are any misaligned switches. Apparently this part was overlooked here. Since the tower operator was removed, makes me wonder if a switch was thrown while the train was progressing into the junction. I also wonder if the supervisor told the crew to back up, which would have called for his/her removal from service.

Most likely that was the case, being they were single tracking. That would be the supervisor's function, to aid in the piloting of the train should problems arise. Also with the functioning of the tower which controls the switch. They obviously started into the junct. on the wrong foot. I wonder what would've happened if they just continued forward. It's kind of tricky messing with a switch with a train on it at the time. They should have just followed through slowly and if it derailed so be it. There was probably no coming back from it anyway once the first wheels passed through. BTW, I may be wrong but was there no east 63rd service while this was happening. Why not just set the switch to favor 63rd/ashland and leave it alone possibly putting some metal clamp into the switch to keep it from switching back. If there was service to east 63rd, there's more possibility of error especially when operating the switch manually. They probably should have had a shuttle for east 63rd. They might be doing that from now on when there is construction in that area.

[Busjack]

BTW, I may be wrong but was there no east 63rd service while this was happening.

The list of work that weekend says

Green Line trains will run in two sections:

• through-trains between Harlem/Lake and Cottage Grove
• shuttle trains between Ashland/63rd and Garfield

Transfer at Garfield station between trains to/from Harlem/Lake and Downtown and trains serving Halsted and Ashland/63rd stations on the Ashland branch of the Green Line.

Note: Customers transferring from trains from Downtown and Harlem/Lake to the Ashland branch shuttle will need to change platforms at Garfield station.

So there was East 63rd service. On further review, I wonder why they didn't use the platform at 58th, which Chicago-L.org says is still there, except that there probably wasn't personnel there to assist the transferring riders.

[BusHunter]

The list of work that weekend says

So there was East 63rd service. On further review, I wonder why they didn't use the platform at 58th, which Chicago-L.org says is still there, except that there probably wasn't personnel there to assist the transferring riders.

Interesting they say to switch platforms at Garfield, like the east 63rd service is running on the NB track. Why not run two shuttles one on each track and make the SB ashland trains and NB east 63rd trains. Fix the switch points to favor each track (if possible) and run them through. Probably the reason not to use 58th would be a questionability on whether the 58th station is sound. (doesn't have any weaks spots or obstructions that could injure an intending passenger. Probably doesn't have any tactile edging either to keep it in par with the rest of the stations) Probably a safety concern more than anything.

[artthouwill]

Interesting they say to switch platforms at Garfield, like the east 63rd service is running on the NB track. Why not run two shuttles one on each track and make the SB ashland trains and NB east 63rd trains. Fix the switch points to favor each track (if possible) and run them through. Probably the reason not to use 58th would be a questionability on whether the 58th station is sound. (doesn't have any weaks spots or obstructions that could injure an intending passenger. Probably doesn't have any tactile edging either to keep it in par with the rest of the stations) Probably a safety concern more than anything.

I heard a couple of rail operators on the Green Line talking this morning that the CTA is pushing to have the female motorman terminated.

Anyway, I believe the Ashland bound trains were operating on the NB track in both directions? Thus to board a SB Ashland train you had to board on the NB platform at Garfield. What I believe should have happened was to run ALL trains to Cottage and use shuttle buses for the Ashland branch.

If there is a tower at 59th Junction, then why are the switches automatically alternating between the branches. It would seem to me that with this system, there is no tower operator there. If there was a tower operator there at the time of this incident, then shouldn't they have control over the switching or are the switches still operating automatically and the tower operator has to override?

There is something amiss when the same thing happens at the same place more than once (won't bother to mention the two RI derailments at 47th). In this instance I think CTA really needs to look at the switching procedures at that location.

[Guest]

With rules constantly being broken at CTA, the frequency or rail mishaps, I cant help but to think of when another tragedy similar to the Feb 4,1977 accident will happen again. I pray that it never happens because I dont want to have to respond to such a tragedy because of someone not following CTA standard operating procedures.

[BusHunter]

I heard a couple of rail operators on the Green Line talking this morning that the CTA is pushing to have the female motorman terminated.

Anyway, I believe the Ashland bound trains were operating on the NB track in both directions? Thus to board a SB Ashland train you had to board on the NB platform at Garfield. What I believe should have happened was to run ALL trains to Cottage and use shuttle buses for the Ashland branch.

If there is a tower at 59th Junction, then why are the switches automatically alternating between the branches. It would seem to me that with this system, there is no tower operator there. If there was a tower operator there at the time of this incident, then shouldn't they have control over the switching or are the switches still operating automatically and the tower operator has to override?

There is something amiss when the same thing happens at the same place more than once (won't bother to mention the two RI derailments at 47th). In this instance I think CTA really needs to look at the switching procedures at that location.

Yeah, the Ashland bound trains were running on the SB tracks in both directions. Being it was a six car train and had about 50 aboard at the time of derailment, it appears it would be the only train out there for Ashland at the time. The east 63rd trains were routed through Garfield from Harlem/lake that day. (sounds like on the NB track to change platforms.) Where the East 63rd trains switched back to the SB track I don't know. Sounds like alot of switching to me. An East 63rd bus shuttle could've solved alot of the complications of all the switching involved. It'll be interesting to see what they do next time.

[jajuan]

Yeah, the Ashland bound trains were running on the SB tracks in both directions. Being it was a six car train and had about 50 aboard at the time of derailment, it appears it would be the only train out there for Ashland at the time. The east 63rd trains were routed through Garfield from Harlem/lake that day. (sounds like on the NB track to change platforms.) Where the East 63rd trains switched back to the SB track I don't know. Sounds like alot of switching to me. An East 63rd bus shuttle could've solved alot of the complications of all the switching involved. It'll be interesting to see what they do next time.

It sounds like everyone is making this a little more complicated than it actually was as far as the switching platforms issue. If the shuttle was on the Ashland branch then the train pulled in the Garfield station on the NB side of the platform then headed back to Ashland/63rd from that same track, switching to the SB track after leaving Garfield at whichever interlock is available to the south of Garfield. The East 63rd trains were through service, so SB trains would already be on the SB track. That's where the switching platform deal comes in, switching from a through service East 63rd train to the Ashland/63 shuttle.

[RJL6000]

Unit 2423-24, which were the cars which derailed at 59th Junction at that time, has been repaired and placed back into service. I saw it at the rear of a six-car unit which was about to leave the Harlem/Lake station this afternoon just as I got off of another 2400-series car (2475).

Today has been my "lucky" day, having seen 2423-24 and a train of 3400s in revenue service on the same line (plus a few 3300s and 3400s in one of the yards on that same line) on the same day.

Speaking of 2423-24, it was converted into a "work-motor-capable" unit a few years after 2401-22 underwent the same conversion. While 2401-22 were converted in the mid-1990s, 2423-24 was converted sometime after the year 2001.

[artthouwill]

I just read on Channel 2's website that the CTA fired the 4 people suspended in the derailment. The Union is supposedly filing a class action lawsuit in response.

[Busjack]

I just read on Channel 2's website that the CTA fired the 4 people suspended in the derailment. The Union is supposedly filing a class action lawsuit in response.

Heard that too.

I remember what someone said about smart layers [sic], but, basically, if it is a labor matter, it has to go to arbitration. See 5 ILCS 315/8. There is certainly no ground for a class action.