1982 RDC wreck details?

Nick L wrote:Poor guy, didn't stand a chance... I wonder how one would deal with crash safety on something like this. There's not a lot of room for energy absorption in a MU I imagine. You could make the cab area (on a full cab MU) be the "crumple zone" which might save the pax but that would be curtains for the engineer if he couldn't get out in time. If you just build it super strong then all the impact energy gets sent to the pax. I saw the pictures of that Pioneer car after the DOT/FRA was through with it, not pretty...

As an engineer, you understand the inherent risks of operating from a cab on the front end like that, in an RDC or a cab car or MU or whatever. And you for lack of a better word, plan escape routes. One thing is to make sure your "grip" (aka bag) isn't in the way, usually stowed against the back wall of the cab or up against the middle door of the cab car (from what I have seen most guys do, and what I do) Some guys also prop open the aisle door to the body of the coach - on some RR's that might be a rules violation, but its done anyway.

Even sitting down there is often a method as to what the engineer does

Sometimes if the equipment has a deadmans pedal its a little harder, but i find myself when I am coming up to a particularly dangerous crossing or location, not even thinking, i will stand up if Im in MUs (they have a deadman pedal) so I can get the heck out of Dodge. While in a cab car (without a deadman pedal), I find myself sitting sideways or with one foot out towards the center of the vestibule if im coming up to a bad location or somewhere where I know there has been an incident in the past.

Some posters dismissed this concern in the Silverliner V cab thread, but its real, and myself and other posters, mainly engineers, tried to show that it is a valid concern. Many times engineers don't even realize that they do it, and can't explain it, but I have seen many different engineers do something when coming up to a particularly bad location in a cab car. Even in a loco I find myself reacting to the location where im at. While locos are stronger and bigger adn heavier and safer for the most part, they can still become tombs. Every time I run NJTs 4219 Im reminded of that (that loco was in the 1996 Secaucus wreck and the engineer was killed in it through no fault of his own), and the loco was rebuilt and renumbered. At least in a coach, you in theory have 85 feet in that car, plus the ohter cars of the train, you can run back away from the point of impact, but in a loco, you have that cab, and thats it. You might be able to scoot down the side walkway if a Geep varient, or go inside the engine room if a full body and may or may not be able to get out hte back end of the loco, but even that has its risks - I don't think i would wanna be inside an engine room with a blistering hot engine and steaming water and oil and in an impact a water line rupturing and getting scalded or burned if a fire were to break out.

Jtgshu wrote:Some posters dismissed this concern in the Silverliner V cab thread, but its real, and myself and other posters, mainly engineers, tried to show that it is a valid concern.

Regardless of how that stacks up vis a vis other safety issues, the convertible cab alternative as provided for in the Silverliner V spec is actually harder to bail out from than the narrow cab, because the convertible cab door is hinged at the back rather than the front.

dreese_us wrote:Here is a report from New York Susquehanna and Western. They found that the RDC's had problems shunting signals while testing the Budd demonstrator in 1950.
Here is the link; http://books.google.com/books?id=c-8Vcw ... #PPA155,M1

Long story short, shunt shoes which are cast iron blocks held against the wheel tread with spring tension. I do not know if this is what Reading/Septa used on their railcars.

Regarding the shunt blocks Septa had them on the Reading SL-IIs (9001-9017) until they were equipped with tread brakes in 1988 or 89. An old timer at Wayne Jct. said they were for proper grounding, but he never said what it grounded. Since the RDCs were equipped with disc brakes I would assume that they were or should have been equipped with shunt blocks too.

Jtgshu wrote:Some posters dismissed this concern in the Silverliner V cab thread, but its real, and myself and other posters, mainly engineers, tried to show that it is a valid concern.

Ditto what Dr. Mitchell said. I still don't buy that it would take an engineer any less time to exit a full cab versus the proposed SV cab. I could buy it if any actual tests were done, but I don't think anyone bothered to do that. It was a comfort issue primarily, but the "safety A-bomb" worked in this case.

Before this devolves into an off-topic fight about the SV cab, I recognize that many engineers had real and sincere concerns about the design. I just happen to believe that they were wrong; I'd be more than happy to be proven wrong myself.

jb9152 wrote:

Jtgshu wrote:Some posters dismissed this concern in the Silverliner V cab thread, but its real, and myself and other posters, mainly engineers, tried to show that it is a valid concern.

Ditto what Dr. Mitchell said. I still don't buy that it would take an engineer any less time to exit a full cab versus the proposed SV cab. I could buy it if any actual tests were done, but I don't think anyone bothered to do that. It was a comfort issue primarily, but the "safety A-bomb" worked in this case.

Before this devolves into an off-topic fight about the SV cab, I recognize that many engineers had real and sincere concerns about the design. I just happen to believe that they were wrong; I'd be more than happy to be proven wrong myself.

You can of course talk about the cab designs in another topic, but unfortunately I can see how that would go. I know myself and that I would get alittle testy etc etc so Id rather not go there.Hehe Also regardless of the fact if anyone feels as though that full width cab is no more safer then half width all I gotta say is ohh well, the SLV will be built with a full cab. The letter from Septa to the BLE has been emailed to me stating that fact. Back to the RDC wreck folks

If we are to adhere to discussing the RDC wreck, then I suppose we shouldn't talk about full vs partial width cabs, or at least shouldn't talk about full width cabs being safer than partial width. Cab width doesn't seem to be something that enhanced safety in this case.
Does anybody feel there was something going on in this accident other than trucker going past crossing guards which may not have been working?
Does anybody feel that full width cab helped anybody in this accident?

gardendance wrote:If we are to adhere to discussing the RDC wreck, then I suppose we shouldn't talk about full vs partial width cabs, or at least shouldn't talk about full width cabs being safer than partial width. Cab width doesn't seem to be something that enhanced safety in this case.
Does anybody feel there was something going on in this accident other than trucker going past crossing guards which may not have been working?
Does anybody feel that full width cab helped anybody in this accident?

The full width cab didnt help in this situation because remember, Septa at that time was running that line with Broad Street Subway personnel and the standard practice was to lock the cab doors so they transferred that practice from the rapid transit to an RDC operated line. Also I mentioned in my earlier post that Septa was made aware by the prior railroad unions that only certain RDC cars could operate singularly and the car in question was not one that could.A select few had this excitation device(IM not sure what it was) to ensure proper shunting of signals and grade crossing apparatus when running a single car train.Of course Septa took what the Reading PC Conrail guys with a grain of salt since they tried to seperate themselves from traditional railroad ways. Having worked at Septa for 6 years , I have heard the stories and read the reports on this. Limejuice, your absolutely right, rain and rust could have contributed to the accident but it was not the cause.Eyewitness accounts I believe stated that the gates flashed but it was intermittent, only reflecting the problem that a single car train without this excitation device creates.In the Book The Reading Lines in the Conrail era by Dale Woodland, he talks about this incident and is basically what I posted. Of course many of the guys I have worked with at Septa were on the railroad at the time of the accident, so they have gone in depth on the problems that Septa had on trying to run the line as a rapid transit service and the corners that were cut in the process.

The fact that that Olds is where it is seems to demonstrate that the oil truck wasn't blowing the flashers. If I'm following an oil truck, I'm not chasing behind it over a flashing RR crossing. That guy was REAL lucky.

Then again if I'm driving an oil truck, you'd better believe I'm looking closely both ways at a crossing.

Jtgshu wrote: Some posters dismissed this concern in the Silverliner V cab thread, but its real, and myself and other posters, mainly engineers, tried to show that it is a valid concern. Many times engineers don't even realize that they do it, and can't explain it, but I have seen many different engineers do something when coming up to a particularly bad location in a cab car. Even in a loco I find myself reacting to the location where im at. While locos are stronger and bigger adn heavier and safer for the most part, they can still become tombs.

I believe you, and I know that it's a very real concern. Most wrecked RDC's that I have ever seen have had what appears to be potential life threatening damage to the cab. Frankly, I'm surprised that this arrangement still exists.

I'm going to be putting up a couple of photos of damaged New Haven RDC's in the NH forum. On the Dover Street Yard shot, I fear that it may have been fatal to the engineer. (If anyone knows it's history, let me know. I believe that it's New Haven #29.)

The only two Reading/CR RDC cars that had exitation circuits on them were the 9151 and the 9152. All other RDC's had to be operated in a consist of two or more cars. All I remember about the exitation circuit was that there was a small electrical box built into the vestibule over the engineer's cabs that showed a green light when the exitation was working properly and showed red when it was inoperative. I don't know the technical side of it, but don't recall ever having a problem when operating these cars by themselves. And yes, SEPTA was warned not to operate any of the other RDC's by themselves. Funny thing though, when they did a re-enactment of the accident several days later, they used the 9152 and as expected, no problems were found.

SCB2525 wrote:The fact that that Olds is where it is seems to demonstrate that the oil truck wasn't blowing the flashers. If I'm following an oil truck, I'm not chasing behind it over a flashing RR crossing. That guy was REAL lucky.

Then again if I'm driving an oil truck, you'd better believe I'm looking closely both ways at a crossing.

If I recall correctly, there was a curve in the direction of Fox Chase. I wasn't even born when that line was still operating, and I never knew it when the tracks were in operating condition, but I did work in the area at some point in my life and knew that area well. I would always look at Southampton station and say "Gee, if that lumber place weren't there, that would make a great park and ride!"

The curve is far enough up not to be an issue, but I do know that the tracks begin to enter a gully past Oskar Huber where the raised land on either side are heavy with foliage, which might make seeing a train difficult. The only thing is, I too wasn't even born when the thing ran and I only moved here in 93, so the amount of brush there may have been completely different.

That being said, I think my point stands; if a flasher is operating at a crossing, I'd say the vast majority of people wouldn't cross it, and even less would follow right behind an oil truck over it.

R3 Passenger wrote:

SCB2525 wrote:The fact that that Olds is where it is seems to demonstrate that the oil truck wasn't blowing the flashers. If I'm following an oil truck, I'm not chasing behind it over a flashing RR crossing. That guy was REAL lucky.

Then again if I'm driving an oil truck, you'd better believe I'm looking closely both ways at a crossing.

If I recall correctly, there was a curve in the direction of Fox Chase. I wasn't even born when that line was still operating, and I never knew it when the tracks were in operating condition, but I did work in the area at some point in my life and knew that area well. I would always look at Southampton station and say "Gee, if that lumber place weren't there, that would make a great park and ride!"

The alignment at Southampton is straight as an arrow until you get north of the station. This was an outbound train so visibility was not a problem and the sun would have been behind the truck driver. I was at the site of the crash approximately an hour after it happened and the flashers were still operating at that time but we've obviously already beaten that issue to death. Despite the alleged signal failure, I was always of the understanding that hazmats, including gasoline tankers, were required to come to a full stop at all RR crossings and question how the truck driver could not have seen a train approaching, especially given that it was moving at only 10 mph as it prepared to stop at the staion. I was fortunate enough to experience this line while in operation and have fond memories of it, except of course for this tragic event. The vision of the smoldering wreckage will forever be etched in my mind.

As an addendum to the signal excitation issue, I recall talking to a signal maintainer when many of the crossings were upgraded after the crash and him telling me that modifications had been made to some of the crossing circuits to allow proper shunting with single car trains, including the use of some sort of an AC circuit using RF transmitters and receivers to detect occupancy.

limejuice wrote:Electric rail equipment is better at shunting track circuits because the ground or neutral side of the traction power circuit passes from the wheel to the rail, which is then bonded to the transformer at the substation. The substantial amount of current drawn by a train or trolley is enough to obliterate the buildup of rust, allowing the comparatively low current track circuit to function. Traction power aside, AC track circuits are more reliable in rusty rail conditions than DC, and coded (pulsating) track circuits are even better, which are found in cab signaled territory.

Budd, I'm going to have to disagree with you slightly. Rain and rust could very well have been a factor in this, but I don't dispute that Septa might have been guilty of not using the proper exciter-equipped units. I don't know for certain, but knowing my history and the kind of territory, I'd bet the track circuits on the Newtown line were steady DC. It's a pretty common thing for a shortline with DC crossings to approach all crossings prepared to stop if there haven't been any train movements over a 24 hour period. Clearly the truck driver was culpable, but it sounds like Septa's hands were dirty too.

Now I've never heard about this excitation equipment, except for the accounts of the accident I've read on here. Not that I'm doubting it, but does anyone have any technical info on it? Seems to me the only way to improve a trains ability to shunt a track circuit is to use an AC power source and hook it up to the wheels to zap the oxidation/rust, using the rails as a ground. I'm not sure rails are a good ground, but maybe good enough? I don't know.

I don't know the technical details, but for what it's worth I was told back in the 1960s by a PRR signal engineer that the PRR had equipped some MP54s with excitation devices for single-car operation between Media and West Chester. At that time the PRR was operating some Silverliners as single cars, but I don't remember whether he said they also had excitation devices. He did say the PRR preferred clasp brakes to keep the treads scraped.

Can someone tell me more about Mike Syzlagi's RDC photo at Dekalb street? If I remember, Dekalb st is on the Norristown line. Was this a train to Reading?