From: ahk@chinet.com   
      
   John Albert  wrote:   
   >On 4/4/16 10:24 PM, John Albert wrote:   
   >>On 4/4/16 7:57 PM, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:   
      
   >>>Any idea what went wrong?   
      
   >Here's some information I got via email. Can't vouch for its accuracy,   
   >just passing along what I saw:   
   >==============================   
   >Train 89 was operating south on #3 track at Track speed (110MPH) near   
   >Thurlow yard and struck a backhoe that was in the gauge of #3 track.   
      
   >At that time, adjacent Track #4 was occupied with a Loram Ballast   
   >Cleaner Vacuum, which had been working together Saturday night.   
      
   >My understanding is that both tracks #3 and #4 were out of service   
   >Saturday Night while this equipment was working, and that #3 track was   
   >restored to service mistakenly,  with the backhoe left in the gauge of   
   >track #3, but not shunting.   
      
   >On Sunday morning an operator mounted the backhoe, assuming the track   
   >was still out of service.   
      
   >Unfortunately both the operator and a supervisor attempting to clear the   
   >machine were killed; both with many years of railroad service.   
      
   Much of this was in the Wall Street Journal article, although it had   
   discussed different track numbers.   
      
   Regardless of the error committed by the previous shift in requesting   
   that the track be taken out of service until the end of their shift,   
   the supervisor of the new shift should have verified that the track was   
   still out of service before entering, and he should have verified that   
   the tracks were shunted.   
      
   Neither track was shunted. Is that correct?   
      
   --- SoupGate/W32 v1.03   
    * Origin: LiveWire BBS -=*=- UseNet FTN Gateway (1:2320/1)