National Transportation Safety Board 

Washington, D.C. 20594

Railroad Accident Brief

Accident No.: DCA-04-FR-005 

Transit System: Chicago Transit Authority 

Trains: Train 419 and Train 509 

Location: Chicago, Illinois

Accident date and time: February 3, 2004, 5:46 p.m.

1

Type of Accident: Rear-end collision 

Fatalities/Injuries: 42 minor injuries

Property Damage: $62,000 

Synopsis 

On February 3, 2004, at 5:46 p.m., northbound Chicago Transit Authority (CTA)

Purple Line train 509 collided with the rear car of standing Brown Line train 419. The 

collision occurred just north of the Merchandise Mart passenger platform (MART) during 

the evening rush hour in Chicago, Illinois. The trains were operating in Automatic Train 

Control (ATC) cab signal territory.2

 The collision occurred on track that is elevated about 

20 feet from street level on a series of open deck bridges. No cars derailed as a result of 

the collision, but 42 passengers sustained minor injuries. A third train (Brown Line train

422) neared the striking train but stopped short of a second rear-end collision. Weather 

conditions were clear and dark; the temperature was 18o Fahrenheit. 

The Accident 

Train 419 departed the MART, and the motorman stopped her train, as required, 

for a stop indication (red cab signal aspect3

) with a flashing R-6.4 cab signal aspect.4 The 

 1

 All times are central standard time. 

2

ATC displays signal aspects and speed limits to the operator in response to track occupancy and track 

conditions ahead. In addition, it enforces a maximum speed restriction, effecting an automatic brake 

application whenever the predetermined maximum speed limit is exceeded. 

3

 In ATC territory, a red signal aspect requires the motorman to stop the train. If the motorman does

not respond within 2.5 seconds, the train brakes will apply automatically.

4

 In ATC territory, R-6.4 is a designation for Rule 6.4, Train Operation at Signals Displaying “Stop”

Indications. After the train has stopped, the rule requires that if the reason for the stop is a train ahead that 

can be expected to proceed shortly, the operator must wait for the signal aspect to change to a proceed

1 NTSB/RAB-04/07
head end of train 419 had traveled about 842 feet from the MART when it stopped. 

Shortly after train 419 departed the MART, train 509 entered the MART to pick up and 

drop off passengers. Radio transmission records indicated that the motorman of train 509 

requested permission from the Communication/Power Control Center5

 to proceed on a R6.4, but there was no response. Train 509 then departed the MART without authority, 

with a stop indication, a flashing R-6.4 indication on his cab signal control console, and 

an audible alarm sounding. 

The motorman of train 509 told investigators that as he operated the train 

northward, he diverted his attention to the street below and was distracted by what he

believed was going to be a vehicle accident. The motorman stated that when he looked 

away from the street and toward his direction of travel, his train was about 10 feet from 

the rear of the stopped train. He said he immediately applied the emergency brakes, but it 

was too late to stop his train, and the train collided with the rear car of the stopped train. 

The motorman estimated that the impact speed was about 6 mph.6

 Train 509 had traveled 

about 542 feet from the MART when it struck the stopped train. Postaccident testing 

showed that the rear marker lights of the stopped train were illuminated and that the rear

car had about 138 feet of preview. 

The third train, train 422, entered the MART immediately after train 509 and 

departed shortly thereafter. The motorman of this train also departed the MART with a

red signal aspect and with a flashing R-6.4 aspect on his cab signal panel. When

interviewed, the motorman told investigators that the audible alarm was sounding. The 

motorman stated that he did not request permission to proceed on a R-6.4. The head end 

of train 422 had traveled about 113 feet from the MART and about 125 feet from the rear 

of train 509 before stopping. 

Postaccident signal testing showed that when train 419 was stopped at the 

accident location, both train 509 and train 422 would have had red aspects and flashing

R-6.4 aspects displayed on cab signal panels, requiring the motormen to stay at the 

MART. Employee interviews, signal test results, and the examination of communication 

records indicate that the motormen of train 509 and train 422 failed to comply with the 

CTA’s requirements for R-6.4.

The Safety Board investigated a similar accident7 on the CTA (within a mile of

this accident) on August 3, 2001, in which Brown Line train 416 struck the rear car of 

Purple Line train 505 when the motorman operated his train on a stop signal indication 

 indication. After the train has been stopped for at least 30 seconds, the train operator shall establish 

communication with the control operator and ask for instructions. 

5

 The Communication/Power Control Center is a dispatching location in which all radio and telephone

transmissions are received and information is facilitated to appropriate personnel. In addition, information 

from an Automatic Train Dispatching and Monitoring System (ATDMS) is monitored. The d.c. current for

train propulsion is also controlled from this location. 

6

 The CTA does not have an event-recording device on this type of train. 

7

 National Transportation Safety Board, Two Rear-End Collisions Involving Chicago Transit Authority 

Rapid Transit Trains at Chicago, Illinois, June 17 and August 3, 2001, Special Investigation Report

NTSB/SIR-02/01 (Washington, D.C. NTSB, 2002)

2 NTSB/RAB-04/07
and a flashing R-6.4 indication on his ATC panel and without authorization from the 

Communication/Power Control Center. 

As a result of the August 3, 2001, accident investigation, the Safety Board 

determined that the probable cause of the accident “was the failure of the operator of train

416 to comply with operating rules. Contributing to the accident was the failure of the 

Chicago Transit Authority’s management to exercise operational safety oversight.” 

The Safety Board also issued Recommendation R-02-22, which asked the CTA 

to: 

Develop and implement systematic procedures for performing and 

documenting frequent management checks to ensure all operating 

personnel are complying with Chicago Transit Authority operating rules, 

including speed restrictions and signal rules. 

The CTA had not responded to the Safety Board’s recommendation at the time of 

the February 3, 2004, accident. On February 12, 2004, the CTA submitted a list of safety 

initiatives to the Safety Board for consideration in response to recommendation R-02-22. 

The letter listed the safety initiatives undertaken since the 2001 Safety Board 

investigation and also set forth additional actions it will take in light of the February 3 

accident. In an April 15, 2004, letter, the Safety Board informed CTA that it had

classified Safety Recommendation R-02-22 “Closed–Acceptable Action.” 

Work/Rest History

The motorman of train 509 reported to work overtime duty at 6:28 a.m. and was 

scheduled to work a split shift.8

 He had worked from 10:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. as a 

switchman before beginning his overtime shift as a motorman. At the end of the first half

of the split shift, the motorman had been on duty for approximately 12 hours. He stated 

that he took about a 3 1/2 hour nap and returned to work at 2:49 p.m. The CTA has an 

agreement not to schedule back-to-back shift work, but this assignment was not a 

scheduled position. Because the assignment was offered as a voluntary overtime position, 

the motorman of train 509 was able to choose to work the back-to-back shifts. 

The railroad industry, unlike rail transit as in this accident, has the Hours of 

Service Act9

 to limit the number of hours a member of a train or engine crew can work. 

Railroad employees are required to have 10 consecutive hours off duty if they work 12 

hours, the maximum number of hours allowed in consecutive service. If railroad 

employees work less than 12 consecutive hours, they must have at least 8 consecutive 

 8

 The split shift schedule for the motorman of train 509 was: to operate the train from 6:45 a.m. to 9:57

a.m., no work scheduled between 9:57 a.m. and 2:49 p.m., operate the train from 2:49 p.m. to 6:57 p.m.

9

 The required work and rest periods as discussed here are an example of the more commonly applied 

aspects of the law. For a complete description of the requirements of the Act, see The Hours of Service for Railroad Employees, contained in Code of Federal Regulations Part 228. 

3 NTSB/RAB-04/07
hours off duty before they come back on duty. The Hours of Service Act is intended to 

address work-rest cycle problems and lessen the possibility of fatigue. 

The motorman of train 509 had a regular work assignment as a switchman;10 he 

was scheduled to work from 10:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m., with Tuesdays and Wednesdays as 

rest days. The CTA designates both the switchman and the motorman as safety sensitive 

positions. 

For safety sensitive positions in the railroad industry, the motorman would have 

been required to have time off duty between shifts and would not have been permitted to 

remain on duty for so long a period of time. The combined effects of limited time

available for sleep and prolonged time on duty have been demonstrated to induce fatigue. 

Studies have shown that fatigue can lead to poor decision-making as well as distraction

from operational tasks. 

In 2000, the Safety Board investigated two Maryland Transit Administration 

(MTA) accidents that involved the failure of MTA trains to stop at the designated 

stopping point at the Baltimore-Washington International Airport. In both cases the train 

struck a hydraulic bumping post at the end of the track. To address the safety factors

affecting both accidents, the Safety Board issued Recommendation R-01-027, which 

asked rail transit systems to “ensure that your fatigue educational awareness program 

includes the risks posed by sleeping disorders, the indicators and symptoms of such 

disorders, and the available means of detecting and treating them.” The CTA senior 

manager, System Safety and Environmental Affairs, told investigators that the CTA is 

addressing Safety Recommendation R-01-027 and is also evaluating other conditions that 

may cause fatigue. 

Train Evacuation 

There were approximately 1,000 passengers involved in the collision. Of these

passengers, the CTA had the names of 483. Forty-two of these passengers sustained 

minor injuries and were triaged on scene. 

Within minutes of the collision, the Chicago Police and Fire Departments 

responded to the accident site. The battalion chief was the forward commander on the 

elevated structure; the incident commander was located in the fire department’s 

command vehicle at street level. As CTA management and other personnel began 

arriving at the scene, they identified themselves to the battalion chief and assumed that he

was the incident commander. This misunderstanding was not immediately corrected and 

may have contributed to incomplete communication at the scene. 

 10 A CTA transit switchman operates railroad switches in an area where railroad cars are sorted and 

assembled, prepares trains for passenger service, operates non-revenue trains and maintenance equipment, transfers trains from yard to yard, and moves trains to station platforms prior to scheduled departure times. 

4 NTSB/RAB-04/07
The passengers were evacuated from the trains and they walked back to the 

MART. A CTA manager later stated that he would have preferred to keep the passengers 

onboard the train and evacuate them at a passenger platform. The fiberglass walkway 

grating between the accident trains and the MART platform was covered in ice and

jeopardized the safe evacuation of the passengers. 

CTA managers worked with the forward commander and eventually11 moved the 

trains forward to the Chicago Avenue passenger platform. About 200 of the remaining 

passengers stayed onboard the trains as they were moved to the platform. By 8:20 p.m., 

approximately 2 1/2 hours after the accident, all the passengers had been evacuated from

the trains. 

After documentation of the activities following the collision identified the need

for improvement in evacuation procedures, CTA officials met with the Chicago Fire and

Police Departments. At this meeting, the CTA agreed to have the appropriate managers 

trained in incident command. A train evacuation protocol and a CTA communication 

protocol also were developed with the fire department. A CTA liaison was appointed, and 

it was agreed that the two agencies would conduct periodic tabletop simulations and 

continue to have debriefings after major emergencies. 

Probable Cause 

The National Transportation Safety Board determines that the probable cause of 

the accident was the failure of the operator of train 509 to comply with operating rules.

Contributing to the accident was inadequate operational safety oversight by Chicago 

Transit Authority. 

Adopted: July 7, 2004

 11 The d.c. current for train propulsion was shut off after the accident. Before it could be restored, all 

personnel had to be clear of the tracks. 

5 NTSB/RAB-04/07