MBTA Derailment South of Haverhill

Discussion relating to commuter rail, light rail, and subway operations of the MBTA.

Moderators: CRail, sery2831

Re: MBTA Derailment South of Haverhill

Postby dbperry » Tue Jan 05, 2016 5:22 pm

I also don't think pre-dawn deadheads are in the mix just to have a train move over tracks that have been idle overnight. From what I understand, deadhead moves are due to either inadequate layover space, the need to keep sets in the city for overnight maintenance, or for crew considerations (can't have a crew start and end their day at different places). I've never heard of using a deadhead train as a de facto inspection service.
Known to Keolis and the MBTA as "Twitter Dave"
Frequently posting about the MBTA Framingham-Worcester line on Twitter: https://twitter.com/FramWorMBTA
Owner of Framingham-Worcester Blog: http://FramWorMBTA.weebly.com/
Maintainer of MBTA schedule archive: http://www.dbperry.net/MBTA/
User avatar
dbperry
 
Posts: 793
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 9:28 pm
Location: Suburbs of Boston

Re: MBTA Derailment South of Haverhill

Postby Type 7 3684 » Tue Jan 05, 2016 7:52 pm

206, 211, and 1635 were the coaches involved. They're all out of service for repairs.
Young train enthusiast who also has an interest in planes and cars
Type 7 3684
 
Posts: 283
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2015 3:36 pm
Location: Newton, MA

Re: MBTA Derailment South of Haverhill

Postby DutchRailnut » Tue Jan 05, 2016 8:09 pm

FRA rules, a wheel if it derails and travels more than x amount of feet off rail, needs to be replaced .
cause bearings could be damaged or wheel plate could have internal cracks
If Conductors are in charge, why are they promoted to be Engineer???

Retired Triebfahrzeugführer
User avatar
DutchRailnut
 
Posts: 21202
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 8:02 pm
Location: released from Stalag 13

Re: MBTA Derailment South of Haverhill

Postby BostonUrbEx » Wed Jan 06, 2016 5:42 pm

The CPF FY/Frye switch was reinstalled in its entirety. They must have also repaired all the track damage to Track 2.
User avatar
BostonUrbEx
 
Posts: 3603
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 9:55 pm
Location: Winn to MPT 8, Boston to MPN 38, and Hat to Bank

Re: MBTA Derailment South of Haverhill

Postby sery2831 » Thu Jan 07, 2016 2:24 am

dbperry wrote:With four sets 'trapped' at the Ballard layover, why couldn't that equipment be routed through the Lawrence Yard and sent around the derailed train on those yard leads? I understand that couldn't have been done with passengers aboard, and it might have even required a PAR pilot, but wouldn't that have been better than leaving them stranded all day?


Our trains can pass through the yard with no pilot and no passengers. The point where the yard and the main goes back to single track was the place of the derailment(CPF-FRYE), so there was no way to move anything west of Lawrence Yard. The train traveled some distance before it stopped. The new interlocking CPF-JK is partially in service, signals work on all tracks but the only Track 2 to yard is operable for crossovers.

And to clear somethings up. The speed there is 60 and this train was doing track speed. This is a scheduled train(#3701) and is to fill a void in Bradford due to space. There are no overnight or early AM track inspections, ALL track patrols are done during the day BETWEEN AM and PM rush hours.
Moderator: MBTA Rail Operations
User avatar
sery2831
 
Posts: 5134
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 2:15 pm
Location: Manchester, NH

Re: MBTA Derailment South of Haverhill

Postby dbperry » Thu Jan 07, 2016 9:26 am

sery2831 wrote: The point where the yard and the main goes back to single track was the place of the derailment(CPF-FRYE), so there was no way to move anything west of Lawrence Yard. The train traveled some distance before it stopped.


My goodness. Amazing those sets stayed upright for that distance.
Known to Keolis and the MBTA as "Twitter Dave"
Frequently posting about the MBTA Framingham-Worcester line on Twitter: https://twitter.com/FramWorMBTA
Owner of Framingham-Worcester Blog: http://FramWorMBTA.weebly.com/
Maintainer of MBTA schedule archive: http://www.dbperry.net/MBTA/
User avatar
dbperry
 
Posts: 793
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 9:28 pm
Location: Suburbs of Boston

Re: MBTA Derailment South of Haverhill

Postby sery2831 » Fri Jan 08, 2016 8:56 pm

Derailed cars were 211-206-1635 for those wondering. The loco(1122) and head two cars that didn't derail are in service.
Moderator: MBTA Rail Operations
User avatar
sery2831
 
Posts: 5134
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 2:15 pm
Location: Manchester, NH

Re: MBTA Derailment South of Haverhill

Postby Type 7 3684 » Sat Jan 09, 2016 10:53 am

I had mentioned the derailed cars in a post above. Would most of the damage to the train be done to the wheels/equipment underneath the train?
Young train enthusiast who also has an interest in planes and cars
Type 7 3684
 
Posts: 283
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2015 3:36 pm
Location: Newton, MA

Re: MBTA Derailment South of Haverhill

Postby jbvb » Fri Jan 22, 2016 8:30 am

Do I understand correctly that the broken rail derailed the cars somewhere around (B&M) MP 23.6 (west of Frye)? They stopped (per photos and my track chart) very close to MP 25. So the half-derailed train passed one, maybe two road underpasses, the Shawsheen depot, the Shawsheen River fill and culvert, the I-495 overpass and the So. Union St. overpass. Lot of close clearances, considerable potential for a much worse accident. Has anyone reported where the train was put into emergency?
jbvb
 
Posts: 1288
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2007 3:50 pm
Location: Rockingham Co., NH

Re: MBTA Derailment South of Haverhill

Postby BostonUrbEx » Fri Jan 22, 2016 9:37 am

jbvb wrote:Has anyone reported where the train was put into emergency?


It wasn't. The crew felt a bump at Frye and brought it down to a stop to inspect the train.
User avatar
BostonUrbEx
 
Posts: 3603
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 9:55 pm
Location: Winn to MPT 8, Boston to MPN 38, and Hat to Bank

Re: MBTA Derailment South of Haverhill

Postby 8th Notch » Fri Jan 22, 2016 12:30 pm

BostonUrbEx wrote:
jbvb wrote:Has anyone reported where the train was put into emergency?


It wasn't. The crew felt a bump at Frye and brought it down to a stop to inspect the train.


Not to mention dumping it isn't always the best solution!
8th Notch
 
Posts: 511
Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2014 1:23 pm

Re: MBTA Derailment South of Haverhill

Postby litz » Fri Jan 22, 2016 1:16 pm

Type 7 3684 wrote:I had mentioned the derailed cars in a post above. Would most of the damage to the train be done to the wheels/equipment underneath the train?


If it doesn't turn over, then yes
litz
 
Posts: 452
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 1:39 pm

Re: MBTA Derailment South of Haverhill

Postby litz » Fri Jan 22, 2016 1:17 pm

8th Notch wrote:Not to mention dumping it isn't always the best solution!


The best stop is always a controlled stop (if possible).

there is nothing controlled about an emergency application ... once you dump the air, you're nothing but another passenger along for the ride.
litz
 
Posts: 452
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 1:39 pm

Re: MBTA Derailment South of Haverhill

Postby Rockingham Racer » Fri Jan 22, 2016 1:50 pm

litz wrote:
8th Notch wrote:Not to mention dumping it isn't always the best solution!


The best stop is always a controlled stop (if possible).

there is nothing controlled about an emergency application ... once you dump the air, you're nothing but another passenger along for the ride.


I like that analysis. :wink:
User avatar
Rockingham Racer
 
Posts: 2897
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 9:25 pm

Previous

Return to Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests