Nov. 2023 Yellow Line Collision

[Mr.NewFlyer1279]

closer pic of 5599

[Sam92]

8 minutes ago, Mr.NewFlyer1279 said:

closer pic of 5599

Ok yeah that might be structural. Wonder what the allowable speed is on that curve for that much to happen... I figured with the lack of straight sight I remember trains being required to basically crawl into that area so I wonder why the Deadman switch didn't respond to the medical emergency that was possibly cited? 

[sw4400]

I wonder why the alerts didn't let them know there was an obstruction ahead and stop the train? I'm referring to that steady alarm tone you hear if you're in the lead car where the operator is at... that's their version of PTC, isn't it?

[Mr.NewFlyer1279]

12 minutes ago, Sam92 said:

Ok yeah that might be structural. Wonder what the allowable speed is on that curve for that much to happen... I figured with the lack of straight sight I remember trains being required to basically crawl into that area so I wonder why the Deadman switch didn't respond to the medical emergency that was possibly cited? 

there’s word going around operator suffered a medical condition minutes before the crash cuz apparently he didn’t answer the radio either…..and the allowed speed on that curve heading into howard is very low i think at 15mph

[artthouwill]

4 minutes ago, Mr.NewFlyer1279 said:

there’s word going around operator suffered a medical condition minutes before the crash cuz apparently he didn’t answer the radio either…..and the allowed speed on that curve heading into howard is very low i think at 15mph

If that is true, shouldn't the train have slowed down or stopped once he entered the 15mph zone?  The way the system is supposed to work is that when the cab sounds to slow down and the operator doesn't do so in about 3 seconds, the train is supposed to automatically brake to a stop. Perhaps it happened but was too late.    Hopefully the NTSB can explain what happened.   It seems like a bunch of things went wrong simultaneously. 

[Mr.NewFlyer1279]

1 hour ago, artthouwill said:

If that is true, shouldn't the train have slowed down or stopped once he entered the 15mph zone?  The way the system is supposed to work is that when the cab sounds to slow down and the operator doesn't do so in about 3 seconds, the train is supposed to automatically brake to a stop. Perhaps it happened but was too late.    Hopefully the NTSB can explain what happened.   It seems like a bunch of things went wrong simultaneously. 

A LOT of things went wrong here…….593 was the incident run and control tried to make contact wit that operator but got no response back and the plow machine didn’t have a shunting train wit it so 593’s cab signal was clear to proceed. so many ppl are gonna take the hit for this from control to operators 

[Busjack]

22 minutes ago, Mr.NewFlyer1279 said:

and the plow machine didn’t have a shunting train wit it so 593’s cab signal was clear to proceed.

Another strange thing. This one reminded me of some New Yawker's reference to their signal project, which said "A legacy signal system is kept in place so trains not equipped with CBTC (such as work equipment) can use these tracks if needed." Obviously, there never was a legacy signal system on this part of the CTA, so if the snow blower unit wasn't equipped to trip the ATC, there's obviously a problem. Like other CTA crashes (Forest Park, O'Hare), I'm sure the NTSB will find a multitude of mess-ups.

[Javi75]

2 hours ago, Mr.NewFlyer1279 said:

closer pic of 5599

My favorite CTA rail cars of all time had its first accident aw. I at least wanted them go a full 10 years after the last pair being delivered without having a wreck so 2025. 

[Bus1883]

2 hours ago, Mr.NewFlyer1279 said:

A LOT of things went wrong here…….593 was the incident run and control tried to make contact wit that operator but got no response back and the plow machine didn’t have a shunting train wit it so 593’s cab signal was clear to proceed. so many ppl are gonna take the hit for this from control to operators 

Especially with all the lawsuits that instantly were filed immediately after the accident. There were other ways this could of have been avoided

[Bus1883]

1 hour ago, Javi75 said:

My favorite CTA rail cars of all time had its first accident aw. I at least wanted them go a full 10 years after the last pair being delivered without having a wreck so 2025. 

There was one to a few other accidents as far as I can scale back. There was a brown and purple line incident four years prior to now. No cars appeared to be damaged. #5476 was the car rear ended by #3390. 

[Bus1883]

1 hour ago, Javi75 said:

My favorite CTA rail cars of all time had its first accident aw. I at least wanted them go a full 10 years after the last pair being delivered without having a wreck so 2025. 

At least all of the other ones are still in service while #5271-5272 are LTH those should return soon. Rail cars or buses put on LTH are held for a few years. If the frame is damaged on #5599 then that’ll sit out for good. The #5000’s are halfway through the FTA service life requirements which is a bout 25-30 years, hopefully the frame isn’t damaged badly but it is already showing the signs especially going at a fast rate of speed. All I can say is that if the train wasn’t going as fast then front of the train wouldn’t be damaged as bad as it looks.

[Kevin]

 

[Javi75]

3 hours ago, Bus1883 said:

There was one to a few other accidents as far as I can scale back. There was a brown and purple line incident four years prior to now. No cars appeared to be damaged. #5476 was the car rear ended by #3390. 

I forgot about that brown and purple incident. It makes you wonder if the signals in the cab sometimes malfunction and don’t notify the operator in time. 

[strictures]

i went past on an NB Evanston train at 11 AM Friday & both were still there on track SK1, so no Skokie service.

[Busjack]

44 minutes ago, Javi75 said:

I forgot about that brown and purple incident. It makes you wonder if the signals in the cab sometimes malfunction and don’t notify the operator in time. 

IIRC, that accident was similar to the 1977 accident where the Lake-Dan Ryan train pushed against a Ravenswood train at Wabash and Lake and pushed itself off the L structure. The signal system didn't malfunction, but one has to wonder about the logic behind its design. A red indication forces a stop, but the operator can restart. I thought to 6 mph, but Graham Garfield said 15 mph. 

The linked article says that Rule 6.4 was then instituted, "that when a motorman receives a false red signal, he must call the Control Center to get permission to proceed. A light in the cab labeled "R6.4" lights up and only on permission from control can he proceed at under 15 mph against the signal." In the case you mentioned, the operator supposedly didn't comply.

[Busjack]

Interesting Sun-Times article from the viewpoint of passengers on the train. Apparently stanchions are another issue, and the operator was thrown through the back partition of the cab. 

[Mr.NewFlyer1279]

8 hours ago, Busjack said:

Interesting Sun-Times article from the viewpoint of passengers on the train. Apparently stanchions are another issue, and the operator was thrown through the back partition of the cab. 

operator had to get a surgery on his leg which lasted 7hrs…..:machine operator almost lost his arm but luckily hospital staff were able to save it, they are expected to make a full recovery??

[Mr.NewFlyer1279]

12 hours ago, Kevin said:

 

I watched this video last night and wish I didn’t lol……I was thinking maybe they can finally give out “some” concrete info on what happened but as of now there’s nothing, they did mention yellow line to be suspended up to wednesday as NTSB will be on scene and investigate for a total of 5 days. Preliminary report to come out in couple weeks.

[Busjack]

4 hours ago, Mr.NewFlyer1279 said:

I watched this video last night and wish I didn’t lol……I was thinking maybe they can finally give out “some” concrete info on what happened but as of now there’s nothing, they did mention yellow line to be suspended up to wednesday as NTSB will be on scene and investigate for a total of 5 days. Preliminary report to come out in couple weeks.

My reaction was similar...a couple of politicians filling abot 15 minutes with nothing to say, although with actual findings being 12-18 months away, that could be expected.

My expectations might have been inflated by the intro to the 4:00 p.m. news, with a reporter standing in front of Skokie Shops awaiting a press conference with Jan Schakowsky, Brandon Johnson, etc., but apparently all they did was ride a 6-car train past the wreck.

[strictures]

14 hours ago, Busjack said:

IIRC, that accident was similar to the 1977 accident where the Lake-Dan Ryan train pushed against a Ravenswood train at Wabash and Lake and pushed itself off the L structure. The signal system didn't malfunction, but one has to wonder about the logic behind its design. A red indication forces a stop, but the operator can restart. I thought to 6 mph, but Graham Garfield said 15 mph. 

The linked article says that Rule 6.4 was then instituted, "that when a motorman receives a false red signal, he must call the Control Center to get permission to proceed. A light in the cab labeled "R6.4" lights up and only on permission from control can he proceed at under 15 mph against the signal." In the case you mentioned, the operator supposedly didn't comply.

I remember that the motorman of the second train at Lake/Wabash was operating under the "Flasher 15" rule, which allowed him to move the train as long as he kept it under 15 MPH.

[artthouwill]

56 minutes ago, strictures said:

I remember that the motorman of the second train at Lake/Wabash was operating under the "Flasher 15" rule, which allowed him to move the train as long as he kept it under 15 MPH.

In that case,  the rule wasn't the problem.   IIRC, he was engaged in a conversation with a female passenger ( when his cab door should have been clised) and he was also under the influence of Marijuana.   Rgat was a situation where he should have been able to stop the train and not hit the Ravenswood train    Even bumping the Ravenswood train wouldn't have been so bad had the operator had just stopped this train upon impact. But being under the influence caused him to either not be aware that he hit a train  or his state of mind was so far out that he continued to push his train forward.  

In the Yellow Line accident,  ur seems like the snowblower equipment wouldn't have any signals attached to it unless it was connected to an actual train.   Assuming that it wasn't,  that could explain why the Yellow line train hit it so hard. As far as his train speed,  maybe he could go faster because he had direct clearance and access to the inner track st Howard where as if he had to use the outer track,  he would have to slow to 15moh to switch tracks. My question is whether the operator had seen this equipment on his prior trips or was he in lynch when the alert was given or was he operating a lunch relief and was unaware of the situation?  If the Tower tried to contact him and he didn't respond or comply, then why?  Was the radio communication clear?  How close was he to the equipment when the instructions were given?  If CTA knew equipment was on the tracks, why weren't slow zone signs posted and why didn't CTA put cable signal slow zones restrictions in place? I don't know if this matters, but why wasn't the equipment attached to the work car train?

[Mr.NewFlyer1279]

3 hours ago, Busjack said:

but apparently all they did was ride a 6-car train past the wreck.

gotta quote u on that one……the team is investigating everything from track condition to signals every small to big thing here’s a few photos they started uploading on flicker it’s not letting me share link 

[strictures]

1 hour ago, artthouwill said:

In that case,  the rule wasn't the problem.   IIRC, he was engaged in a conversation with a female passenger ( when his cab door should have been clised) and he was also under the influence of Marijuana.   Rgat was a situation where he should have been able to stop the train and not hit the Ravenswood train    Even bumping the Ravenswood train wouldn't have been so bad had the operator had just stopped this train upon impact. But being under the influence caused him to either not be aware that he hit a train  or his state of mind was so far out that he continued to push his train forward.  

In the Yellow Line accident,  ur seems like the snowblower equipment wouldn't have any signals attached to it unless it was connected to an actual train.   Assuming that it wasn't,  that could explain why the Yellow line train hit it so hard. As far as his train speed,  maybe he could go faster because he had direct clearance and access to the inner track st Howard where as if he had to use the outer track,  he would have to slow to 15moh to switch tracks. My question is whether the operator had seen this equipment on his prior trips or was he in lynch when the alert was given or was he operating a lunch relief and was unaware of the situation?  If the Tower tried to contact him and he didn't respond or comply, then why?  Was the radio communication clear?  How close was he to the equipment when the instructions were given?  If CTA knew equipment was on the tracks, why weren't slow zone signs posted and why didn't CTA put cable signal slow zones restrictions in place? I don't know if this matters, but why wasn't the equipment attached to the work car train?

I don't know why any of those things weren't done, but I do know one thing from waiting for trains for decades at Howard:  The Howard Tower operators seem to run a different rail road than the rest of the CTA!  I can't tell you how many times they load up both tracks 1 & 2 with SB trains to 95th, which prevents both Skokie & Evanston trains from going through the station after dropping off their passengers on the SB platform, so they can get to the turn back track to go back north. 

And lately they also been clogging up both NB tracks with Howard trains, because apparently one has a motorman that's now off duty, but then there's no one to take the train into the yard or no new motorman to take it into the loop track to return south. 

[artthouwill]

45 minutes ago, strictures said:

I don't know why any of those things weren't done, but I do know one thing from waiting for trains for decades at Howard:  The Howard Tower operators seem to run a different rail road than the rest of the CTA!  I can't tell you how many times they load up both tracks 1 & 2 with SB trains to 95th, which prevents both Skokie & Evanston trains from going through the station after dropping off their passengers on the SB platform, so they can get to the turn back track to go back north. 

And lately they also been clogging up both NB tracks with Howard trains, because apparently one has a motorman that's now off duty, but then there's no one to take the train into the yard or no new motorman to take it into the loop track to return south. 

It is always interesting at Howard.   Seems like Yellow Line trains are the least prioritized. Red Line trains have the highest frequency therefore gets top priority .  During rush periods SB, I've seen Purple and Yellow Line given the outside track with the inside track is for Red Line trains.   NB gets Purple Line Express trains on the outer track with some Reds using it between Purple Line Express trains.  Yellow always seems to board on the inner track.  During non rush, Purple Line and Yellow share the inner track with Reds primarily on the outer track.  However,  the last time I was there the Red Line pulled into the inner track while the Purple Line shuttle was on the outer track.  I do know where the Yellow Line train was, though my guess is that it left the inner track before my train pulled in.

[Busjack]

3 hours ago, artthouwill said:

In that case,  the rule wasn't the problem.

IMO, while there were concurrent causes (and there always are in a CTA accident*), the rule was a major contributing cause. There's no reason why the signal system should allow a train to go 15 mph when there is a train parked just around the curve maybe 15 feet ahead. If the rules in force in 1977 were adequate, there would be no need for rule 6.4 (which I noted, the operator in the Brown-Purple accident reportedly violated).

Maybe someone can explain why a red indication is not a "STOP AND STAY" instead of "forced stop and then go 15 mph" into a collision.

-------------

*Forest Park: Train on a track connected to the main line, wheels not on chocks, water in the control cable.

O'Hare: Inexperienced and overworked operator, too high speed limit.