American railroads of
the nineteenth century were not known for being safe. Grand disasters occurred
with frightening regularity, and news of them was splashed upon the front pages
of publications across the country. Not-so-grand disasters, on the other hand,
struck the workers of the railroads much more regularly. In the latter portion
of the nineteenth century, many very important safety advancements were made to
mitigate these disasters, thanks to the combined efforts of manufacturers,
independent organizations, the government, the press, the public, railroad
laborers, and (to an extent that is not often given a fair amount of
recognition) the railroads themselves. The stories behind these advancements
combine to form a tale of very imperfect progress - the type of progress most
common in our world.
The Republic Train Crash, and others like it, could have been prevented by the newest, best air brakes. |
The situation would
have been even more hopeless a few years prior, when all trains were stopped
primarily by brakeman-operated hand brakes on the tops of individual cars.
Thankfully, in 1868, George Westinghouse invented the straight air brake, which
enabled the engineer to control all car brakes with a lever in the locomotive
cab. Since it could stop trains more quickly because it could be applied to the
entirety of the train faster than a mechanical brake could be applied to a
single car, the trains could travel faster and more safely.
But there were
limitations to straight air brakes. On long trains, the brakes would apply to
the front cars immediately, but would take a short while to apply to the
rearmost cars. So if the engineer applied them too aggressively, he could jolt
the train in a damaging way. And if the brake had clogged valves or bent
rigging or jammed pipes, it wouldn’t work properly. Even more significantly, if
an air-carrying hose burst, all air would escape and no pressure could be built
up. To fix this problem, Westinghouse introduced the automatic brake in 1873.
Now a fall in brake-pipe pressure would apply the brakes, not release them, so
a train with a broken hose would safely slow to a stop. And, as a bonus, the
automatic air brakes applied more quickly than the straight air brakes did.
Even though they still
had the other limitations of the straight air brakes, one might imagine that
railroad managers would have been eager to apply them to their trains by the
time of the 1877 crash. And many railroads did - at least on their passenger
lines, where they could competitively market the greater speeds that air brakes
permitted. The Express Train that rammed into No. 26, and many other trains,
were equipped with straight air brakes. They would have had the faster-braking
automatics, but the B&O managers probably decided not to upgrade the
train’s braking system a second time. After all, straight air brakes already
allowed them to market greater speeds and thus garner more passengers and thus
make more money. Expending similar amounts to install the newest model, which
was fairly similar to what they already had, may have seemed unattractive.
Freight lines present a
different story. Most of them wouldn’t have generated greater profits or a
better public image running faster and safer trains. While passengers going
from Baltimore to New York might care about saving a half hour, a mining
company shipping copper from Montana to the east coast wouldn’t. And because
freight cars far outnumbered passenger cars (by 1890, they were 34 times as
numerous on a national level) it would have been much more expensive and time
consuming to modify them. Early on, railroad companies also faced opposition to
air brakes from locomotive engineers, who were wary of the unfamiliar new
technology’s functionality. But many would change their tune, and from 1874
onward the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers would lobby for legislation
mandating air brakes. But this made little difference. By 1890, though ~96% of
passenger cars were equipped with air brakes, only ~9% of freight cars had
them. Clearly, the economics of the situation largely controlled the progress
being made.
At least until
politicians were rallied to action after reading the Interstate Commerce
Commission’s (ICC’s) first national fatality statistics. They revealed that,
that year, ~2,000 employees were injured and ~500 were killed from falling off
of trains (most of these casualties are assumed to be brakemen operating hand
brakes on the tops of cars). That’s 10% of all employee injuries and 25% of all
employee deaths that year. Even some of the most economically conservative politicians,
like Henry Cabot Lodge, were shocked into action, and by 1893 Congress passed
the first legislation regulating railroad safety, the Safety Appliance Act.
Quoth the original act,
“from and after the 1st day of January, 1898, it shall be unlawful for any
common carrier engaged in interstate commerce by railroad to use on its line
any locomotive engine not equipped with...appliances for operating the
train-brake [air brake] system...or to run any train...that has not a
sufficient number of cars in it so equipped with...train brakes that the
engineer on the locomotive drawing such train can control its speed without
requiring brakemen to use the common hand brakes for that purpose.” The
railroads vigorously lobbied to delay the date that the act went into effect,
and successfully moved it forward to 1 August 1900.
Since most Passenger
Service (PS) trains were already well equipped (the year the legislation was
passed, ~98% of PS locomotives and ~97% of PS cars already had the brakes) not
much progress was recorded. Much more significant was the impact on the longer
and more numerous freight service (FS) trains. Only ~76% of FS locomotives had
the brakes in 1893, but ~98% had them in 1901. Similarly, a measly ~19% of FS
cars had them in 1893; ~73% had them in 1901.
Luckily, by the 1900s,
most engineers had been trained to operate these air brakes, but this had not
been the case in earlier decades. This was dangerous, because controlling the
brakes required a deft touch; if the engineer applied them too quickly, he
could buckle the train, and if he released them too quickly, he could cause it
to break in two at an overstressed coupler. And if he had made a number of
service stops using his air brake, he might discover in the unfortunate seconds
of an emergency that his air reserves had been mostly depleted.
By 1882, only two major
railroads, the Erie and the New York Central, had air brake instruction cars
with which to train enginemen. Finally, in 1889, Westinghouse constructed one,
which it sent to various railroads to provide free instruction on brake use to
engineers; many major railroads followed his lead and made their own in the
1890s. The Master Car Builders Association (MCBA) also developed a widely
circulated code of rules for air brake use in 1891, while the Locomotive Engineering journal started
publishing a regular section on air brakes, and labor journals like Locomotive Firemen’s and Enginemen’s
Magazine wrote extensively about air brake maintenance and operation.
Air brake instruction cars, like this, were often constructed out of (or in the style of) passenger cars. |
But even though almost
all trains had air brakes by the 1900s and almost all engineers knew how to use
them, they weren’t all used. Instead, some trains would still stop via hand
brakes, which had not been unequipped when the air brakes were installed. Early
in the decade, more regulatory rules were applied, mandating that 75% of every
train’s freight cars have air brakes and that all trains utilize all their
equipped air brakes. Yet afterward, in 1907, the ICC investigated and
discovered that ‘hand brakes are sometimes used’ on the Northern Pacific, that
on the Southern Pacific on some grades ‘hand brakes are used on all trains,’
and that the B&O, among other eastern lines, still operated some trains
wholly or largely with hand brakes. It wouldn’t be until the popular ‘Safety First’
movement of the 1910s that the use of hand brakes would finally be phased out.
Come
back next Monday for A Dangerous Ride - Installment Two and learn about advancements in coupler
technology.
Write
to August at write2hutchinson@aol.com
1 comment:
Great blog post.
Post a Comment