Amtrak crash interesting take

I have a lot more sympathy for the engineer as more facts come out regarding their training on the route.

I  have a different view, Tommy.  My sympathy for the Engineer is zero.  Empathy, well, yes, I do have an abundance of that for a man who must struggle, for the rest of his life, with the knowledge that he caused people to die and to be seriously injured by his deficient work performance.  That is not a cross any of us would want to bear.

But I have absolutely no sympathy for a passenger train Engineer who obviously did not adequately prepare himself to operate over new territory.  Yes, that's right, I said prepare himself.  The government has determined that training and re-training of Engineers and Trainmen is necessary for safe operation of the nation's railroads.  However, additionally, Engineers have individual responsibility to be prepared for the train they are to operate and the territory they are to operate it over.  A passenger train is a huge responsibility for an Engineer.  There are numerous opportunities for on-board injuries to be caused by train handling, even if there is not a wreck.

And -- really -- how much training should be needed to operate over a few miles of new route?

I can't believe he did not have a "talk with himself" before leaving the initial terminal, and that he did not comply with the right-of-way speed signs.  BNSF puts a 45-degree speed sign two miles in advance of a speed restriction, and then there is another (horizontal) sign at the actual location where the permanent speed restriction begins.  Even if the Engineer is not as familiar as he might wish, this is plenty of warning for any kind of train.  He may have been a fine fellow, but the derailment resulted from a personal failure.

And there has been nothing said about an qualified official riding in the cab of the very first revenue train to operate across the new route.  Did the Road Foreman of Engines not think that some first-hand observation of train operation over the new line on the first day would be a good investment of his time?  Proper Preparation Prevents Poor Performance.  Unfortunately, the result says that the Engineer did not prepare properly, and he gets no sympathy from me.  The Road Foreman, who is responsible for coaching the team, was apparently not at the game.  If it was not due to handling some other extremely urgent matter elsewhere, I can't work up any sympathy there, there, either.  Did the Superintendent not think that supervisory evaluation would be beneficial, not only for the opportunity to critique positively or negatively, but also as a good outward sign of interest in safe train operation?

So, the way I see it, this is a big black eye for the railroad Division, caused primarily by the Engineer, and secondarily by the Division management.  It raises questions about the overall culture on that part of the railroad.  Maybe this was a unique occurrence, but, it also may be indicative of lax performance standards on the Division.  It's only my opinion, but I am unimpressed.

OK, those who have had engine cab experience.  If you are running the engine, and are "lost" as to your location, what should you do?  Stop safely and call dispatch?  Reduce to restricted speed and call dispatch????

And concerning Amtrak outside of trackage it owns:  what railroad does the Road Foreman answer to?  My guess it is the host railroad.

Dominic Mazoch posted:

OK, those who have had engine cab experience.  If you are running the engine, and are "lost" as to your location, what should you do?

Just my opinion but, I would first slow, second get a mile post number, third refer to my employee timetable.

 Stop safely and call dispatch?

No. Think about this for a minute; if YOU don't know where you are, how would notifying/asking the Dispatcher help?

 Reduce to restricted speed and call dispatch????

No. See above.

Edit:  Lets remember that "dispatch" is a Taxi Cab term, while the railroad industry in North America uses "Dispatcher". 

I fully agree with EVERYTHING Tom (NUMBER 90) just posted!

The fog will roll in and obscure the real facts eventually. When the report comes out, no one will remember.  Was there ever any  report released of the videos  or  trip recorders besides the first one ??

If you doze off momentarily or become "lost" at your location, simply do as Hot Water suggests:  slow down and look for a landmark or milepost that can help you, and that's the reason the employee timetable has mileposts noted so you can locate siding switches, curves, stations, etc.  

Do NOT broadcast your situation on the radio!  Nothing good can come from "turning yourself in" over the radio.  Fix your own problem, continue the trip, and be better for it.

Hot Water posted:

Dominic Mazoch posted:

OK, those who have had engine cab experience.  If you are running the engine, and are "lost" as to your location, what should you do?

Just my opinion but, I would first slow, second get a mile post number, third refer to my employee timetable.

**Conductors are supposed to record each mile post, time they passed it along with speed and any known speed restrictions in the required conductors log book.  They must also have as unexpired copy of Track warrants for bulletins listing all track conditions along with subdivision general orders.

 Stop safely and call dispatch?

No. Think about this for a minute; if YOU don't know where you are, how would notifying/asking the Dispatcher help?

**Yes, Thats exactly what we train/teach/tell them to do.  Stop, notify the dispatcher immediately.  With the CAD screens the dispatchers use, with the exception of TWC and/or TWC-ABS, ie; track warrant also known as dark territory, their last signal knocked down will show and will be relayed as them between mp xxx and mp xxx, now possibly delayed the block, crew will be instructed proceed at restricted speed until next governing signal.

 Reduce to restricted speed and call dispatch????

No. See above.

**Yes, See above 

 

Please see the above quote, I responded in bold red lettering.

Number 90 posted:

If you doze off momentarily or become "lost" at your location, simply do as Hot Water suggests:  slow down and look for a landmark or milepost that can help you, and that's the reason the employee timetable has mileposts noted so you can locate siding switches, curves, stations, etc.  

Do NOT broadcast your situation on the radio!  Nothing good can come from "turning yourself in" over the radio.  Fix your own problem, continue the trip, and be better for it.

Im sorry, totally disagree with your statement.  In fact, not only are they required to contact dispatcher, they must also make an attempt to inform other trains near the location in either direction (trains on the same radio channel).  

Will there be discipline?, probably not.  Maybe a delaying a train coaching, that about it.  Possibly save lives, absolutely!  

The worst that will happen is the crew room bantering back and forth between railroaders, and you get a new nickname that will follow you for the rest of your railroad career, lol.

Passenger train Conductors don't keep a Signal Awareness Form (otherwise known as the "Conductor Awakeness Form") as do Conductors on freight trains.

I could figure out for myself that I was delayed within the block, and proceed according to the applicable rule.  I would not need the Dispatcher sticking his nose into the matter.  To me, not being competent enough to figure out my own location would be shameful.  Engineers get good pay for what they know as much as for what they do.  I ran passenger trains at 90 MPH in coastal fog so thick that there was only a second to see a mile post, a whistle board, or the aspect of a signal that loomed out of the gray.  For additional awareness, I had the cab window open and listened to landmarks pass.  If you do not know where you are in the fog, you are in deep trouble.  This also included making intermediate station stops when I couldn't see to the rear past the first locomotive unit.  That was the job at its worst, and the expectation of management, the train crew, and myself, was that I would safely and efficiently do my work under any conditions and not need to ask for help for simple things.  Every other Engineer on the route had the same expectations.  You have to know when you need help and when you don't.  There's help, and then again there's hand-holding.  It's probably a good thing that I am retired.

And, as to dozing for a few seconds and not being sure of what color the last signal displayed, not every personal failure on the railroad needs to be elevated to whole-Division alert.  A close call for a competent Engineer is not always a bad thing, if there is no damage and if it permanently changes future behavior.  

And, to answer Dominic, if the Engineer was employed by Amtrak, then Amtrak Road Foremen would be the officials responsible for his coaching.  If BNSF, then the railroad would be the entity.  The railroad Road Foreman should test Amtrak Engineers periodically, jointly with the Amtrak or other foreign-line officials who share a common employer with the Engineer.  But the employer coaches the employees.

Just as there  is no crying in baseball (a League of their own) there's no getting lost in railroading.... Hokey smokes!!

Budkole posted:

Hot Water posted:

Dominic Mazoch posted:

OK, those who have had engine cab experience.  If you are running the engine, and are "lost" as to your location, what should you do?

Just my opinion but, I would first slow, second get a mile post number, third refer to my employee timetable.

**Conductors are supposed to record each mile post, time they passed it along with speed and any known speed restrictions in the required conductors log book.  They must also have as unexpired copy of Track warrants for bulletins listing all track conditions along with subdivision general orders.

 Stop safely and call dispatch?

No. Think about this for a minute; if YOU don't know where you are, how would notifying/asking the Dispatcher help?

**Yes, Thats exactly what we train/teach/tell them to do.  Stop, notify the dispatcher immediately.  With the CAD screens the dispatchers use, with the exception of TWC and/or TWC-ABS, ie; track warrant also known as dark territory, their last signal knocked down will show and will be relayed as them between mp xxx and mp xxx, now possibly delayed the block, crew will be instructed proceed at restricted speed until next governing signal.

 Reduce to restricted speed and call dispatch????

No. See above.

**Yes, See above 

 

Please see the above quote, I responded in bold red lettering.

Except, you overlooked the fact that the train in question, i.e. the Amtrak PASSENGER train that exceeded the posted 30 MPH speed through a sharp curve, had the on-duty Conductor BACK IN THE PASSENGER CARS, as do ALL Amtrak passenger trains. The only other person in the cab of Amtrak train #501 was a Conductor making his/her "familiarization/qualification" runs over the new by-pass line.

Only answered the relevant general question(s) set forth.

Budkole posted:

Only answered the relevant general question(s) set forth.

Maybe for the short line RR you work for.

Budkole posted:

Out of curiosity, why do you think I work for a short line, or was that one of your sneaky lil underhanded pokes?  Just curious.

I just assumed that your RR has no Amtrak operations, or at least none where you work. Plus, having spent many, many, many miles on both the BN/BNSF and UP, I've never seen a Conductor "logging" every mile post & signal.

I get that one should be familiar with the route and I sort of get the training took place at night and things look different in the light of day.  From a lay persons point of view, things look clearer in the light of day, so nice try but that dog don't hunt.  Also, and I know this from having been at FT LMc several years ago, the route out of Lakewood is dead straight up to that curve.  Anyone looking down the route would have or should have seen the speed reduction sign and noticed that the long straight track did not continue off to the horizon.  The bunch of trees getting closer and closer would have been a clear indication to anyone with a pair of eyes looking in the proper direction.  Enough with the getting lost, one does not navigate a locomotive, one operates it.  Someone screwed up big time and it cost lives.  That someone was the individual charged with operating the locomotive.  There may be mitigating or contributing circumstances with regards to training or PTC but the engineer failed to maintain situational awareness.  

Hot Water posted:

Budkole posted:

Out of curiosity, why do you think I work for a short line, or was that one of your sneaky lil underhanded pokes?  Just curious.

I just assumed that your RR has no Amtrak operations, or at least none where you work. Plus, having spent many, many, many miles on both the BN/BNSF and UP, I've never seen a Conductor "logging" every mile post & signal.

Good guess!, but I don't work for a shortline. Although, sometimes I wonder what it would be like.

They only record when the signal is less than clear or any unusual situations.

I’m fighting to deal with two premises that I believe are correct (but might not be so).

1. The engineer is aware that there is a 30mph curve area somewhere on the route.

2. The engineer doesn’t know exactly where the 30mph zone is located.

If you were driving your car on a highway where there was a known low speed zone at some location, would you just set her at just above highest posted speed and put her cruise control and turn up the music? Wouldn’t you be on the lookout for the sharp curve? As I understand the engineer didn’t apply the brakes. How careless can they have been? I just don’t get it!!

The disturbing part of all these AMTRAK events is the apparent lack of training, judgement and "situational awareness" of the engineer plus the reluctance to hold anyone responsible for the loss of lives. 

TM Terry posted:

I’m fighting to deal with two premises that I believe are correct (but might not be so).

1. The engineer is aware that there is a 30mph curve area somewhere on the route.

One would have hoped so!

2. The engineer doesn’t know exactly where the 30mph zone is located.

Not quite true, since there are "advance" 30 MPH speed boards, 2 miles from where the 30 MPH actually takes effect. Thus, the sixty four thousand dollar question is, how did the Engineer and "extra individual" in the cab miss, or not remember that advanced speed board? At a speed of 78/79 MPH, he should have "started to slow down" less than 1 mile after passing the "advance" speed board.

If you were driving your car on a highway where there was a known low speed zone at some location, would you just set her at just above highest posted speed and put her cruise control and turn up the music? Wouldn’t you be on the lookout for the sharp curve? As I understand the engineer didn’t apply the brakes. How careless can they have been? I just don’t get it!!

You are trying to compare apples and oranges. 

Hot Water posted:

TM Terry posted:

I’m fighting to deal with two premises that I believe are correct (but might not be so).

1. The engineer is aware that there is a 30mph curve area somewhere on the route.

One would have hoped so!

2. The engineer doesn’t know exactly where the 30mph zone is located.

Not quite true, since there are "advance" 30 MPH speed boards, 2 miles from where the 30 MPH actually takes effect. Thus, the sixty four thousand dollar question is, how did the Engineer and "extra individual" in the cab miss, or not remember that advanced speed board? At a speed of 78/79 MPH, he should have "started to slow down" less than 1 mile after passing the "advance" speed board.

If you were driving your car on a highway where there was a known low speed zone at some location, would you just set her at just above highest posted speed and put her cruise control and turn up the music? Wouldn’t you be on the lookout for the sharp curve? As I understand the engineer didn’t apply the brakes. How careless can they have been? I just don’t get it!!

You are trying to compare apples and oranges. 

 

With little to no railroad knowledge apart from model railroading, that was the best I could do.

Number 90 posted:

  To me, not being competent enough to figure out my own location would be shameful.  Engineers get good pay for what they know as much as for what they do.  I ran passenger trains at 90 MPH in coastal fog so thick that there was only a second to see a mile post, a whistle board, or the aspect of a signal that loomed out of the gray.  For additional awareness, I had the cab window open and listened to landmarks pass.  If you do not know where you are in the fog, you are in deep trouble.  This also included making intermediate station stops when I couldn't see to the rear past the first locomotive unit.  That was the job at its worst, and the expectation of management, the train crew, and myself, was that I would safely and efficiently do my work under any conditions and not need to ask for help for simple things.  Every other Engineer on the route had the same expectations.  You have to know when you need help and when you don't.  There's help, and then again there's hand-holding.  It's probably a good thing that I am retired.

Tom

I always enjoy reading what you have to say.  I especially enjoyed this comment.  It reminded me of a retired Seattle Fireman that I know.  (Not Firefighter.  He was proud that his department ID card was old enough it listed his rank as Fireman.)  Regardless of the weather he always drove to an alarm with his window down to better hear traffic.  One of his Lieutenants  complained about his driving habits until those habits saved them from getting clobbered by a bus one foggy day.  He had a little Honda motorcycle to better tour the streets of his district on his time off.  And he even took other members of his crew around the district on their days off to show them places and things they needed to know. 

I have known several people in other professions with the same kind of expectations for themselves that you guys have.  I understand why you are all happy to be retired.  But those of us who are still working sure miss you. 

Well, there is always a different view in accidents similar to this...

some say that it's fully 100% the drivers fault for the accident, and those people don't understand the pressures and complications of being not just a driver, but a passenger driver. Most say that the driver barley has anything to do in the cabin of the modern engine becseu the computers do all the work, but similar to a car all the computer does is tell you how fast your going and controls the AC. There is certainly a number of crashes that have the driver to blame, usally being ones where the driver is going too fast around a bend or not paying attention to the rails but to there phones, which is now sadly common in many crashes, but you still can't blame the driver for all of the accidents.

Many modern day blunders are caused by many things. Some can be blamed on M.O.W. crew for not mantaining tracks correctly or some can be blamed on the service shops the engine last attended due to parts of the locomtive nit being checked and neglected, causing failures in systems like air brakes and speedometers, or even the weather can be to blame due to fog or heavy snow or rain to the point where tracks are no longer visible to the naked human eye.

And many crashes are chased by a mix of both human neglect and mechanical failures, but we must always look for the problems in accidents and fix them on future books and guidelines. Sometimes punishments are not stick enough and so railroaders take risk, which can cause derailments. But also think about this, most trackage ran by Amtrak in the west is not owned by them, but by Union Pacifc and BNSF. Similar to what wendover procutins mentioned in his "Why Trains Suck in America", UP and BNSF prioritize slower fright trains over faster passenger trains, which cause drivers to be late which cause passenger complaints. So, many drivers try to speed up there train to go faster to make up for lost time, so in my opinion  one of the reasons why you hear about how Amtrak trains are late by many hours or how they derail when the train is going 80 in a 30 zone, I think it's mixed between the drivers not paying attention, or trying to make up for lost time. 

(Remember, this is all opinion so please don't get angry with me about what I think about something.) 

RDGCO.Productions posted:

Well, there is always a different view in accidents similar to this...

 

(Remember, this is all opinion so please don't get angry with me about what I think about something.) 

So, just how much time/experience do you have as a promoted Engineer in either Amtrak, freight, or older passenger service?

Hot Water posted:

RDGCO.Productions posted:

Well, there is always a different view in accidents similar to this...

 

(Remember, this is all opinion so please don't get angry with me about what I think about something.) 

So, just how much time/experience do you have as a promoted Engineer in either Amtrak, freight, or older passenger service?

Sadly I'm not, however I volunteer with M.O.W. work and many of my fellow volunteers are retired engineers, conductors, electricians, etc. I have actually gotten to speak with one who was involved with an accident back when Amtrak first started with its P30CHs. He was helping with a HEP failure and found when he went into the engine that its interior engine was in terrible shape, neglect from the people serving it. 

If you did it, you're guilty. Doesn't matter what verdict the jury hands down.

If you're going that fast into a 30 mph curve, the maintenance, the training, the weather, what you ate for breakfast, and any other facts are irrelevant -

you're guilty.

RDGCO.Productions posted:

some say that it's fully 100% the drivers fault for the accident, and those people don't understand the pressures and complications of being not just a driver, but a passenger driver. Most say that the driver barley has anything to do in the cabin of the modern engine becseu the computers do all the work...

"Driver?" "Cabin?" This was almost painful to read...

smd4 posted:

RDGCO.Productions posted:

some say that it's fully 100% the drivers fault for the accident, and those people don't understand the pressures and complications of being not just a driver, but a passenger driver. Most say that the driver barley has anything to do in the cabin of the modern engine becseu the computers do all the work...

"Driver?" "Cabin?" This was almost painful to read...

Sorry, I'm not the one to be technical with diesel locomotive sections. I usally say cabin like the cabin of the plane, not cab, same goes as I say driver or operator instead of engineer because for the operation of diesel and steam, My opinion is that you should use two different names since you take different qualifications for steam or diesel operation.

RDGCO.Productions posted:

smd4 posted:

RDGCO.Productions posted:

some say that it's fully 100% the drivers fault for the accident, and those people don't understand the pressures and complications of being not just a driver, but a passenger driver. Most say that the driver barley has anything to do in the cabin of the modern engine becseu the computers do all the work...

"Driver?" "Cabin?" This was almost painful to read...

Sorry, I'm not the one to be technical with diesel locomotive sections. I usally say cabin like the cabin of the plane, not cab, same goes as I say driver or operator instead of engineer because for the operation of diesel and steam, My opinion is that you should use two different names since you take different qualifications for steam or diesel operation.

No matter what your opinion is, the term "Engineer" has been, and still is, used throughout the railroad industry on the North American Continent, for well more than 100 years (regardless of the tasing/qualification processes). The term "Driver" in the railroad industry, is pretty much used throughout the United Kingdom and Europe.

RDGCO.Productions posted:

Sorry, I'm not the one to be technical with diesel locomotive sections. I usally say cabin like the cabin of the plane, not cab, same goes as I say driver or operator instead of engineer because for the operation of diesel and steam, My opinion is that you should use two different names since you take different qualifications for steam or diesel operation.

But the cabin in an airplane is where the passengers sit--not where the pilot sits. So that makes no sense either. If you called the cab of a diesel a "cockpit," that would be sort of understandable -- but still wrong.

As for different qualifications, what does that have to do with the price of tea in China? One's a "diesel engine." The other is a "steam engine." Both are engines, which require the skills of an engineer for safe, efficient operation.

I do believe we should try to use appropriate and accepted terms in our posts. Sure, you’re free to post whatever you like, but this is a model railroad forum; and this sub-forum is an actual railroad forum. 

I feel privileged to learn from the experienced members. There is a wealth of knowledge to be had. And we should surely respect their desire that we express our thoughts with acceptable terms when we know them. 

Number 90 posted:

If you doze off momentarily or become "lost" at your location, simply do as Hot Water suggests:  slow down and look for a landmark or milepost that can help you, and that's the reason the employee timetable has mileposts noted so you can locate siding switches, curves, stations, etc.  

Do NOT broadcast your situation on the radio!  Nothing good can come from "turning yourself in" over the radio.  Fix your own problem, continue the trip, and be better for it.

Agreed, as long as there is no apparent immediate danger of which one is aware.  Temporary loss of situational awareness is that - temporary.  At 90mph it can be immediately dangerous, at 30mph less so ---- unless the draw immediately in front of you is up.

necrails posted:

I get that one should be familiar with the route and I sort of get the training took place at night and things look different in the light of day.  From a lay persons point of view, things look clearer in the light of day, so nice try but that dog don't hunt.  Also, and I know this from having been at FT LMc several years ago, the route out of Lakewood is dead straight up to that curve.  Anyone looking down the route would have or should have seen the speed reduction sign and noticed that the long straight track did not continue off to the horizon.  The bunch of trees getting closer and closer would have been a clear indication to anyone with a pair of eyes looking in the proper direction.  Enough with the getting lost, one does not navigate a locomotive, one operates it.  Someone screwed up big time and it cost lives.  That someone was the individual charged with operating the locomotive.  There may be mitigating or contributing circumstances with regards to training or PTC but the engineer failed to maintain situational awareness.  

That section of track between Lakewood and that 30 MPH curve is not “Dead Straight,” necrails.

There are at least four curves.

It pretty much follows I-5 and I-5 is not straight in that area.

Larry

Wow, there's so many, "I'm more of a RR pro than you are" chest-thumping posts here, it was painful to read this thread.

That said, I'm not a RR employee and never have been, but I do know the engineer and as I understand it from someone actually involved in the ongoing investigation who is with Amtrak, the procedure for the train they'd established on the training runs (all done at night and in good weather, by the way), was to do some manner of brake application as the train passed under the Center Driver overpass (a bridge I drive over every work day), and the train would be in a good speed condition to get through the curve. No other applications were apparently done on those training runs after passing under that bridge.

Just relaying what I was told.

So, it boils down to if that application was indeed made. Did weather play into it? It was a very wet morning. Did any mechanical issues happen? Did he just not make said application at the bridge? I think this might be the key to what really happened.

p51 posted:

Wow, there's so many, "I'm more of a RR pro than you are" chest-thumping posts here, it was painful to read this thread.

That said, I'm not a RR employee and never have been, but I do know the engineer and as I understand it from someone actually involved in the ongoing investigation who is with Amtrak, the procedure for the train they'd established on the training runs (all done at night and in good weather, by the way),

Since the operation of train #501 was "in the dark", i.e. very early morning, it was apparently appropriate to conduct the training  runs in the dark. 

was to do some manner of brake application as the train passed under the Center Driver overpass (a bridge I drive over every work day), and the train would be in a good speed condition to get through the curve.

If the location you describe was about 1 mile from the curve, and 1 mile from the advance 30 MPH speed board, such a brake application would be in order.

No other applications were apparently done on those training runs after passing under that bridge.

Just relaying what I was told.

So, it boils down to if that application was indeed made.

So far no reports from the NTSB have indicated that ANY "brake applications" were made prior to the 30 MPH curve.

Did weather play into it? It was a very wet morning.

So far, the NTSB has said nothing about weather being a "factor" in the derailment.

Did any mechanical issues happen?

Again, no reports from the NTSB people have indicated such.

Did he just not make said application at the bridge?

According to statements from the NTSB, the ONLY "brake application" was when the derailment occurred (at 78 MPH), and the air brakes went into emergency, which was NOT initiated by the Engineer, according to down-load information from the event recorders (from both the rear and front diesel units).

I think this might be the key to what really happened.

Absolutely!

I find it either amazing or disappointing, not sure which yet, that there is no ownership for the very clear screw up by the operator.  We seem to want to find any reason possible to blame someone or something else for the crash.  So we don't quibble over the details further this is a clear case of operator error.  Now did Amtrak set up the scenario due to training faults, that will be determined at some point by the NTSB.  Were the brakes applied and they didn't work, not sure if that can be determined.  If there is an inward facing camera then we can certainly glean from that what was going on in the cab.  I am sure the locomotive operator is racked with guilt and is playing the scenario over and over in his mind but the final determination will not be in doubt, operator error.  

Now the question is how to create a cab environment where these errors can be prevented or inattentive operators can be culled from the herd before this happens again.

Unless you have been in the cab, whether by yourself, 2 or 3 man crew.... you have no idea how easy it is to lose your "situational awareness". Most violations occur for that specific reason. Form A, Form B, red blocks, running into the back of another train, speeding... you name it. 

Things happen (go by) very very fast when you're having a conversation in the cab, especially at maximum authorized speed. We can only speculate, but I believe it was all human factor, whatever was being discussed between the two men in that cab, it passed them right by in a matter of seconds. Like it usually does.

Additional information, related to this disastrous Amtrak derailment:

The first two people to file law suits against Amtrak, are 1) Garrick Freeman - 48, the Amtrak Conductor that was the second person in the cab, making familiarization runs on the new by-pass line, and suffered a shattered pelvis and cracked ribs, 2) passenger Pennie Cottrel, riding in the 7th car, suffered broken collarbone, broken ribs, neck injury, and various internal injuries.

This information was released by the Oregonian News Service. 

It raises an interesting question (and not being a railroad professional, it may be a stupid one), but you kind of have to wonder in this day and age why they haven't applied GPS technology, which isn't exactly rocket science these days. Similar to the nav systems on cars, or the nav systems with built in nautical charts, couldn't they have something with the route map built in that shows the engineer where they are at any given time? So if he didn't know where he was, he could see, for example, he was between mile market X and Y, and the chart could have the speed restriction zones. From a technical aspect there is no reason something like this couldn't be in the cab, does  anyone know if railroads have anything like this? I am not blaming the lack of this technology for the crash or trying  to absolve or condemn anyone, just curious if this kind of thing exists. It isn't PTC, it is simply an aid to an engineer to know where they are.