@@feminazislayer It's sickening to see someone laughing at someone else's comment that should have never been made where in a situation like this it could have been a lot worse. You laughing at someone else's comment and that person making the comment they did shows that you two are not only immature there's a lot more wrong with both of you.
Radio control locomotives strikes again. Fairly common now day as the railroads are cutting cost by having untrained personnel running locomotives like a Toy RC car. Most people are not locomotive engineers or even Conductors operating these things.
@@Ollie1979 It's common knowledge that engineers are being eliminated to save money and switching locomotives are being operated remotely. Tons of youtube videos on the subject.
Exactly what i commented, They submitted to wallstreet and investors, then try to cut out manpower was its very necessary by doing this bs automation and shrinking down crews. Railroads are vital but these dumbasses behind a desk dont know a damn thing about the field
He won the other part of the lottery two lawsuit every decade WOW 😅 I bet CSX wanted to buy his property. He said no because he’s making more money them crashing into his house then selling the property.
The original purpose was to add power in the middle of a long freight train. In that instance there was still an engineer at the front of the train controlling it.
@@James_Knott DP is a different idea, and system than RCO. DP has been around a lot longer. There are redundancies to a train with DP, first being an engineer controlling the DP from the train itself. RCO remotes do not have as much information on their controls as locomotive computer screens do in the cab.
Build a massive stopping bunker berm at the end of the line, and stop remote controlling the trains like if it were a model train set. Pretty simple fix really.
Raise your hand if you think that a 3500# car did ANYTHING to slow down that 400,000# locomotive. Was the home built BEFORE the tracks were installed, or were the tracks built first? What city planner allowed a home that close to the railroad? Or vise-a-versa?
I doubt that....I bet the tracks were their first. Way first Turntables are used in yards to turn a single locomotive around. Wye's are used so they can turn, depending on how long the wye is , a locomotive ,many locomotives and as many cars as the why is long.
CSX statement translated 'Our primary focus right now is the health and solvency of our shareholders and executives. We will make noises to the effect of concern for the surrounding community, environment, and labor to keep people from looking too closely at our labor practices. CSX appreciates the swift actions of government agencies in cleaning this up while we dodge as much public scrutiny and legal accountability as possible to minimize losses to admin and shareholders. The cause of this incident will not be found to indicate that unoccupied operations are a problem and our own internal investigation is sure to pin the blame on whatever the least financially damaging scenario is that we can extrapolate from the record of events. We are sure we can fix this with our public relations staff and avoid the dreaded expense of hiring additional employees and employee training.'
@@cdavid8139 No, the dudes in the railroad should build a end-of-track buffer that stops a slow moving consist _before_ it fouls the street. A shock absorber, a sand drag, all that stuff.
@@u2bear377 on that we can agree u2bear.. Whether or not the railroad owned property was there first or not does not mean the railroad should not take sufficient precautions to protect the public. A bulldozer and a mound of dirt and this incident doesn't happen.
@@cdavid8139 Yeah, I feel like most people live where they have to these days. Telling someone to sell their house instead of having adequate public safety is kind of the problem honestly. Privately owned rail has always been a bad idea. The first time two companies decided to slam two trains together for fun, and it went wrong, should have been the earliest wake up call that the decision making need not be in the hands of non-professionals. Anyone who remembers Con-Rail should be sad that it failed. The U.S government should have primary control over all of the rail lines in the country. This way they could mandate better working conditions, higher pay, and far, far better safety practices, without the inevitable corporate pushback and subsequent layoffs, firings and pay reductions that would follow, because of greed. Remote control trains... we can't even accurately operate remote control toy cars.
@@xX_Gravity_Xx Name ANYTHING the government runs in the USA that is run well. Conrail I remembered well. They abandoned thousands of miles of track and hundreds of customers, cut thousands of jobs and then sold to the highest bidder. Amtrak is a government run rail operation that is a disaster and one of the worst passenger rail operations in the world. Our privately owned rail operations move incredible tonnage with little taxpayer support (indeed railroads pay taxes). Rail salaries in the US are among the highest blue collared salaries in North America. And I am not advocating telling anyone to sell their house. Just suggesting that when you buy a home do not buy it next to an industrial area, airport, or rail operation. Use your brain.
It’s a Y they use that to turn around a train and this is why I hate locomotives not manned railroads need to stop trying to save money and put safety 1st
I used to be a telecommunications technician with Canadian National and back in the mid 70s, when I worked in Northern Ontario, I frequently rode freight trains. Back then, there were 4 crew members on a freight train, the engineer and brakeman in the locomotive and the conductor and brakeman in the caboose.
@@James_Knott Same with me James. I started out with 4 man crews in the 70s. ANd throughout the years I watched as high-tonnage trucks running at 70mph on the government paid for interstate highway systems ate our lunch. ANd back in those days in 1970 the train crew spend 1/2 of their time doing absolutely nothing.
@@cdavid8139 They weren't the only ones with time on their hands. That's the way it was in telecom too. You work when something fails, but you have to be around just in case. Also, when I was working up north, I often had to wait hours for a train to pick me up. I recall one trip. I was in Capreol, Ont., which is where I was based. I got a call to go to Foleyet, which is some distance north. I hopped on a freight at about 4 PM, with my shift ending at 4:30. I got to Foleyet and had my work done in about half an hour. I then went for dinner, someone invited me to their home for a couple of drinks, hopped another freight to go back around mid night and got back to Capreol around 7 the next morning. All but the first half hour was at time & a half overtime, that is 4:30 PM to 7 AM, with straight time for the first half hour. I was trying to sleep on a bench in the caboose, but was occasionally tossed off by the motion! On another occasion, I had to fly from Toronto to Edmonton. Again, I was finished my work in a half hour, so I turned around and took the next plane back to Toronto!
@cdavid8139 They weren't the only ones with time on their hands. That's the way it was in telecom too. You work when something fails, but you have to be around just in case. Also, when I was working up north, I often had to wait hours for a train to pick me up. I recall one trip. I was in Capreol, Ont., which is where I was based. I got a call to go to Foleyet, which is some distance north. I hopped on a freight at about 4 PM, with my shift ending at 4:30. I got to Foleyet and had my work done in about half an hour. I then went for dinner, someone invited me to their home for a couple of drinks, hopped another freight to go back around mid night and got back to Capreol around 7 the next morning. All but the first half hour was at time & a half overtime, that is 4:30 PM to 7 AM, with straight time for the first half hour. I was trying to sleep on a bench in the caboose, but was occasionally tossed off by the motion! On another occasion, I had to fly from Toronto to Edmonton. Again, I was finished my work in a half hour, so I turned around and took the next plane back to Toronto! There were plenty of other occasions when I'd be riding in the club car, having a beer, while being paid time & a half! 🙂
@@James_Knott I think all long time railroaders have similar stories. I've sat in a cab for an entire job and never turned a wheel. Sort of the nature of the beast at times
Why did that locomotive have to turn around? It's a switching locomotive (an EMD GP38-2 to be exact). They're designed to go backwards and forwards through the yards to move freight cars to where the cars are needed. There should have been no need to use that wye track to turn it around.
Either for maintenance or refuelling or just using the Y to run around a rail car, but you are correct they are remote control so direction doesn’t matter
@@James_Knott as the OP said already, it’s a remote controlled yard switcher, it doesn’t leave the yard, and no one is on board driving it, therefore it doesn’t matter what direction it is facing, this has also been said in the story
Several reasons. One is maintenance so you even out wheel wear. ANother is that they needed the low-hood facing another direction. THere was definitely a reason. Railroads do not make moves like this just to burn time.
So they operating this loco only around the yard and she never has an engineer on board? So she's controlled from the yard master tower? Did someone had too much ongoing movements and forgot that there is a locomotive running remotely into a end of track?
exceptionally common. Ever see a train with more than one locomotive? The others are linked via remote control to the primary at the head of the the train. (used to be wired, now they're remote) .. same thing with trains that have an engine in the middle of the length of cars. Remote controls are frequently used in freight yards to move cuts of cars around to make up a train prior to departure. The operator can walk around and get a much better idea of distance, leading to reduced coupler damage, etc.
This is your government prescribing the rail roads to cut thier costs and letting them use terrible technology to do so, just wait till AI starts to interfere with everyone's daily lives...
It wasn't a train, it was just a locomotive. The "wye" track (@1:10) that approaches the garage is for turning a locomotive (or perhaps a pair of locomotives) around. Yard operations are performed at very low speed, and by using a remote control, the operator can walk around and decouple cars manually without having to get in and out of the locomotive. The operator was most likely standing near one of the three turnouts so they could be manually thrown from one track to the other. They might have thought the turn-around track was longer than it actually is, or they might have gotten distracted, but either way they were most likely within line of sight of the locomotive at the time.
This is exactly why driverless and autonomous trains and semi-trucks is a bad idea. Hell even autonomous cars have proven to be a bad idea over and over again. Be it a locomotive, semi-truck, or a piece of heavy construction equipment like a bulldozer, there needs to be a human onboard in case things do go wrong in which they can intervene. In this case, it appears the remote control operator was either positioned on the front catwalk of the locomotive or even standing on the ground by the switch and not paying attention to the locomotives position. At any rate, most locomotives have dashcams which will show where the remote operator was at the time of the crash. Whether CSX railroad will allow us to see that video footage is yet to be seen.
So you immediately jump to the conclusion that the operator was not paying attention? You must be in management. Yep. Let's blame the crew first!!!! No need to look further.
That didn't "jump" the track. They drove it off the end of the track, straight through the end of track bumper and dirt berm. They were operating it way too fast for that length of track for it to have had enough energy to go that far through so much stuff. Should have been going 5 MPH at most on such a short track.
@@cdavid8139 Bwahaha! Try physics. The mass of the locomotive doesn't change, so the energy needed to plow through all of that stuff came from one variable... SPEED.
@@Orxenhorf the SPEED of the locomotive can changed and you leapt to the conclusion that an employee operating the locomotive was moving it 'way too fast'. That is what management often does. "The plane crashed...must be the pilot". The boat ran aground..."must be the captain". The train went on the ground..."Must be the engineer'. In this case, from the information I have, the locomotive and/or the RC unit had issues. But hey...good ole Orxenhorf is gonna blame the hard working employee without any research at all.
@@cdavid8139 CSX has already said that it was not equipped for remote control (If you think RC fails into accelerate mode, you're a bigger fool than your irrelevant and unrelated ideas about planes and boats.) and that two employees were onboard trying to reposition it when it began to roll due to HUMAN ERROR. They jumped off when they realized they couldn't stop it.
I figured as much. I've been seeing a growing trend of "don't build your home near a railroad track", when all that serves to do is blame the victim for the railroad companies failures. Railroads run straight through towns, carry volatile and toxic cargo, and quite a few of them literally get built next to apartment complexes and in general directly into poorer or less desirable neighborhoods, AFTER the neighborhood was already there. It matters not, when what was built first. That argument won't make houses cost less, or give anyone that's died in this manor their lives back. The corporate railroads need to be held responsible for the countless thousands they've killed, and the countless lives they've destroyed.
The train didn't jump, the tracks. The tracks just ended, under the locomotive. Remote control cabs?? Is American companies, getting THAT FRICKIN CHEAP??? There should always be an engineer, or two, on board at all times. We need more regulations, in American businesses.
The only way to fix this is to END remote control. Put crews back on the locomotives! As a Railfan, I have always been opposed to remote control. I have several railroad friends who think the same way. Railroads implemented remote control for only ONE reason: to maximize profits to the top brass while minimizing safety. There should be at least two crewmembers on every train any time it is moving; three minimum on local switchers, turns and yard transfers. At one time, most freight trains had 5 crewmembers on them back when cabooses were still in regular use. The conductor always rode in the caboose along with a brakeman or switchman. The engineer was always in the lead hog (of course). There were also a fireman or brakeman, and another switchman in the lead locomotive. The railroads should bring back 5-man crews and cabooses. With recent, increasing reports of detector failures, it would be a good thing. Err on the side of safety. (Of course, I know it will never happen.)
Correction, there was a leak of some diesel fuel from the train. The tank has a capacity of 2,000 gallons, but highly unlikely that entire contents were lost.
Happened before and railroad did not build a mound of soil to block sound and locomotives/runaway railcars? On the yellow sign, change "Motorcycles" to *Locomotives* .
People getting angry at remotely operated trains...the idea is that with the engineer being outside he has a better view, and can arguably operate much safer than being inside a closed box with poor visibility and no visibility of the danger areas. Relying on someone outside on a radio to scream commands adds delay to the reaction time, which could be critical. Fear of technology is unfounded. Aircraft have had autopilots for 60 years, and land themselves. A remotely operated train is magnitudes more reliable.
“Remote controlled train locomotive runs off end of track” Fixed your title. How fast was that train going to run through the bumper block? Why even have a bumper block if it isn’t going to hold whatever hits it? Why not have a derailer there to help stop it before it hits the house?
On behalf of CSX, I wish to offer my sincerest apologies to Santa Claus. Rest assured, he will be fully compensated for all damages. In addition, I'd like to congratulate him on his recent weight loss.
Maybe I'm out if my league here, but I think a better way to prevent an accident like this from occurring again is to not have a home just feet from the end of a track. Either buy the land or shorten the track.
Apparently a yard job. Should have seen on Ulmerton Rd , Conrad switcher shoved empty Hopper's off the end of the storage track on to the hwy with no track.
No need for engineers to remain on the train, just stay at the end it's going to. Stay at the front of the locomotive if it's going that direction or the the other end if it's going that way. That's how it works here in The Netherlands (if there is only an engineer and therefor they're using RC, but mostly there is an engineer in the locomotive and a 2nd one who does signal the engineer when to slow down/stop).
That is 100% a radio-controlled locomotive those are the only locomotives I've seen a fixed with Amber strobe beacons on top of the cab there there to warn people about remote-controlled operating locomotives has a warning device to anybody that may be near by the locomotive
Years ago Metra rail in Chicago had a CGI image of an parked F40PH locomotive in a garage starting it's motor, then, the garage door opens and, the locomotive heads downtown whisking commuters with it. Well, CSX managed to make it a reality.
Years ago i was watching a train pass by and the train tracks were flexing up and down. Next couple days i pass by and i see about 20 train cars laid over in people's yards.
Who ever thought it was a good idea to build a house right in front of a buffer stop on a shunt line or build a shunt line buffer stop right up to a residence ? Glad no one was hurt and no doubt CSX will cover all rebuilding costs but serious steps need to be taken to prevent another occurrence and possible loss of live. Either get rid of that shunt line or build a barrier at the end of the track that a locomotive can't circumvent or put a driver on that locomotive. Not only did the residents get lucky but CSX got lucky no one was killed just for the sake of saving a few pennies on drivers. Okay, you Americans call them engineers or conductors, in Oz we call them drivers.
In a sane country, the railroad would be forced by the local government to relocate to a non residential area after the second incident. We live in a country for stockholders however
