[PRCo] Re: #1727 Accident

[James B. Holland]

Harold Geissenheimer wrote:

>Greetings
>There was an uphill derail on Fineview to restrain a car drifting back
>down the hill.
>
>Did the S Hills Jct. derails also serve to prevent cars entering the
>tunnel from one track sideswiping a car entering on another track?
>

             This is a side benefit of the interlocking of the two as 
mentioned by Boris.     This was all interlocked with the outbound 
turnout so 44-, 47-, and 48-line cars would not collide with inbound 
cars.     The interlocking was installed because the previous tower man 
tired of constantly throwing turnouts and kept turnouts for one line 
open too long thus causing delays on the other lines!     Traffic 
through here was extremely heavy.

             Were the derails installed Primarily:

                         1.>--  To catch cars with bad brakes???????

                         2.>--  To stop a car without a motorman???????

             Don't know that we can specifically name The Primary Reason 
for installing the derails without one PRCo document so stating  --  but 
the derail served both purposes above.

             Remember that  ALL  crew changes for  ALL  lines here 
happened right here, both inbound and outbound.     And while company 
rules Most Probably stated that one operator could not leave a car 
before his relief was on board, It Did In Fact Happen All The Time.     
Then there are those times when the operator leaves the car to go to the 
restroom or to get more transfers or change  --  distinctly remember 
operators  *slugging*  the car which is placing the reverser all the way 
forward to pull in full dynamics if the car starts moving.     So a 
derail would prevent a car from running away without an operator on board.


Jim Holland