[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

RE: (erielack) Wreck at Newburgh Junction...

...but none on the Newburgh Jct. accident...


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Riley [mailto:wdperson_@_hotmail.com] 
> Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 9:44 AM
> To: sunderhj_@_worldnet.att.net; erielack@lists.railfan.net
> Subject: Re: (erielack) Wreck at Newburgh Junction...
> 
> 
> Hank and list,
> 
> Did a quick search and found this: 
> http://www.ntsb.gov/Publictn/R_Acc.htm
> 
> This URL has some reports on it.
> 
> Mike Riley
> 
> >From: "Henry Sundermeyer" <sunderhj_@_worldnet.att.net>
> >Reply-To: "Henry Sundermeyer" <sunderhj_@_worldnet.att.net>
> >To: "Tupaczewski, Paul R \(Paul\)" <paultup_@_lucent.com>,   
> ><erielack_@_lists.railfan.net>
> >Subject: Re: (erielack) Wreck at Newburgh Junction...
> >Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 09:04:05 -0500
> >
> >A while ago there was a reference to, perhaps,  the NTSB or similar 
> >site that archived the actual investigation summaries.  
> Unfortunately, 
> >I've lost the URL.  Has anyone looked for this incident in those 
> >reports? I found reports on the two metro NYC accidents that I'm 
> >closely related to: 1951 Woodbridge and the 1958 Newark Bay bridge 
> >accidents.  Plenty of detail, route alignments, signals, dispatcher 
> >reports, etc. in these reports. Hank
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Tupaczewski, Paul R (Paul)" <paultup_@_lucent.com>
> >To: <erielack_@_lists.railfan.net>
> >Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 8:27 AM
> >Subject: (erielack) Wreck at Newburgh Junction...
> >
> >
> > > Based on Al Tillotson's pretty comprehensive response and 
> the recent
> >thread,
> > > here is a short essay by Arthur Erdman, former EL tower operator, 
> > > that pretty thoroughly describes the incident...
> > >
> > > - Paul
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 54. Encounter at NJ
> > >
> > > The tower at NJ had been closed for about a year, with the 
> > > interlocking being remote controlled by the West End Train 
> > > Dispatcher in Hoboken, New Jersey. In addition to NJ 
> being remotely 
> > > controlled, the interlocking
> >itself
> > > was reconfigured to allow for higher speed movements 
> through it. An 
> > > equilateral turnout was installed where the Main Line and 
> the Graham
> >Line
> > > single tracks separated, allowing a clear, or high green, signal
> >indication
> > > to be displayed on the home signal at NJ for westbound trains. A
> >westbound
> > > train lined for the Graham Line siding at NJ received a medium 
> > > approach,
> >or
> > > a center yellow, indication on the home signal. This arrangement 
> > > would
> >have
> > > a significant role in the event which was to occur.
> > >
> > > Croxton 99 (CX99) was usually ordered at Croxton Yard at 
> 4:05 AM for 
> > > a
> >4:30
> > > AM departure. CX99 was an all-piggyback train, 
> predominantly United
> >Parcel
> > > Service (UPS) trailers. Each division office, as well as the EL's 
> > > system office in Cleveland, Ohio closely watched this train. Each 
> > > minute of
> >delay
> > > had to be accounted for. The operation of CX99 was a true 
> > > cooperative
> >effort
> > > on the part of management and employees, and UPS responded by 
> > > keeping
> >this
> > > traffic on the EL. It was a pleasure to watch CX99 change 
> crews at 
> > > Port Jervis. The train did not even stop, with the New 
> York Division 
> > > crew stepping off and the Susquehanna Division crew 
> stepping on with 
> > > the
> >train
> > > moving at a walk. When the crew change was completed, the 
> Engineer 
> > > would open the throttle and take off like a "Flying 
> Saucer" (to use 
> > > an Erie
> >term),
> > > heading for Chicago.
> > >
> > > The New Jersey Department of Transportation had recently replaced 
> > > the
> >old
> > > Erie Stillwell Coaches and RS3, GP7 and E8 locomotives with new 
> > > General Electric U34CH locomotives and Pullman-Standard push-pull 
> > > cars for the
> >EL's
> > > suburban passenger service. This new equipment eliminated 
> the need 
> > > for locomotives to run around their trains at the end of 
> the run, or 
> > > to turn locomotives such as the E8's. There was an 
> equipment train 
> > > run, Number
> >X-51,
> > > that left Suffern, NY at 5:10 AM destined for East Greycourt, NY, 
> > > where
> >it
> > > changed direction to cover Train 50 from Monroe, NY to 
> Hoboken, NJ. 
> > > This train consisted of a U34CH west out and six 
> push-pull coaches. 
> > > CX99
> >usually
> > > departed Croxton Yard HX at 4:30 AM. With X-51 scheduled to leave
> >Suffern
> >at
> > > 5:10 AM, there was generally a conflict between the two trains at
> >Suffern.
> > > To avoid delay to CX99, the Dispatcher would operate X-51 west on 
> > > the eastbound track between Suffern and NJ whenever possible, 
> > > leaving the westbound track clear for CX99. This was the 
> case on the 
> > > morning of
> >Friday,
> > > March 9, 1973. Train X-51 departed Suffern on the 
> eastbound track on
> >time
> > > that morning, quickly disappearing in the heavy fog. About 10 
> > > minutes
> >later,
> > > CX99 passed SF Tower at Suffern on the westbound track. CX99 this 
> > > day
> >had
> > > two EL U33C engines and about 55 cars, all piggyback. The crew of 
> > > X-51
> >had
> >a
> > > routine each morning of stopping for coffee at the Red Apple 
> > > Restaurant
> >at
> > > MP 40.0. This was the case on this fateful morning. After getting 
> > > their coffee, X-51 departed the Red Apple, headed for NJ. The 
> > > Engineer of CX99
> >had
> > > his first glimpse of X-51's red markers fading into the fog while 
> > > approaching the Red Apple.
> > >
> > > In order to give CX99 the fastest possible move at NJ, the Train
> >Dispatcher
> > > decided to hold the signal at stop for X-51 and line CX99 from the
> >westbound
> > > track to the Graham Line, Main Track so CX99 would receive a Clear
> >signal
> > > indication. The Dispatcher could have lined CX99 for the 
> Graham Line
> >siding
> > > and X-51 for the single track Main Line simultaneously, but this 
> > > would
> >have
> > > given CX99 a slower signal, delaying CX99 for several minutes. The
> >westbound
> > > home signal at NJ for the eastbound track is a small, single light
> >ground
> > > signal. The westbound signal at NJ for the westbound track is a 
> > > tall, three-target ground mast type signal. X-51 was 
> approaching NJ 
> > > in the
> >heavy
> > > fog and the engine crew apparently could not see the 
> ground signal 
> > > displaying Stop for them. X-51 passed the red home 
> signal, proceeded
> >into
> > > the interlocking, ran through the power switch and headed for the 
> > > Graham Line. When the engineer on X-51 realized he was on 
> the Graham 
> > > Line, he stopped the train. CX99 was cruising along at Arden, NY 
> > > approaching Automatic Signal 43-1, which was displaying 
> Green over 
> > > Red, or Clear.
> >Signal
> > > 43-1 was the distant signal to NJ. Based upon the indication on 
> > > Signal
> >43-1,
> > > CX99 knew they were lined up at NJ. Just as CX99 passed 
> Signal 43-1,
> >X-51
> > > ran by the Stop signal at NJ into the path of CX99. The 
> engineer on 
> > > X-51 began to key in the remote control radio base 
> station at NJ to 
> > > report to
> >the
> > > Train Dispatcher that he was on the Graham Line instead 
> of the Main
> >Line.
> > > CX99 came out of the fog at NJ to an all red (Stop) home 
> signal and 
> > > X-51 standing in front of them on the Graham Line. The 
> Engineer of 
> > > CX99
> >placed
> > > the train in Emergency and he grabbed the Fireman and 
> both fell to 
> > > the
> >floor
> > > of the engine.
> > >
> > > 5:40 AM, Friday, March 9, 1973: CX99 collided with X-51's rear 
> > > control
> >car.
> > > The control car rode up onto CX99's lead engine 3305 into 
> the cab. 
> > > Fortunately, by laying on the floor of the engine, the 
> Engineer and
> >Fireman
> > > survived. The Control Car then continued in the air, 
> landing on the 
> > > cab
> >of
> > > CX99's rear unit. The Conductor and Head Brakeman of CX99 had been
> >thrown
> >to
> > > the floor in the collision, and they too survived. The 
> crew of X-51 
> > > was either on the engine or in the west coach so they also were 
> > > uninjured.
> >The
> > > weekend of March 10 and 11 were spent cleaning up this horrendous 
> > > mess.
> >The
> > > fog had claimed another victim, in this case more than 
> one. If the 
> > > tower
> >at
> > > NJ had not been eliminated, could the Towerman have possibly 
> > > prevented
> >this
> > > accident?  Questions that can never be answered...
> > >
> >
> 
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at 
> http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
> 

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