Amtrak Derailment Outside Philadelphia

Yes, most "short distance" Amtrak trains have only one Engineer. Amtrak routes/trips of more than 4 hours (I believe it is still 4 hours) have an Assistant Engineer, who is qualified,  in the cab also.

OK then, please inform us all where exactly the BNSF and the UP have "active speed control" (PTC) installed and functional, i.e. NOT just an experiment, on their systems

Hot Water, specifically and without doing a lot of research, I do not know what parts of the BNSF or UP have PTC installed.  I have read that they have some portions controlled by PTC, most probably as test areas.  As implied by Happy Pappy they are not covered throughout their system.  The only system I know to be completely controlled is the Metroliner after their terrible crash 2-3 years ago.  Amtrak has PTC from Boston to NY and from Philly to DC. 

Here is a good article reviewing what has been done by Freight haulers.  From Progressive Railroading and written in August 2014.

 BNSF is in various stages of wayside construction, with some subdivisions further along than others, says Dave Galassi, BNSF's assistant vice president of network control systems.

"We are in the process of construction on somewhere close to 30 subdivisions now, and we have completed implementation on two of those subdivisions," Galassi says. "And we are about to go into revenue service on eight more. ... By the end of the year, our plan is to have 28 subdivisions in revenue service."

Over the course of the implementation program, BNSF plans to equip 5,500 to 6,000 locomotives. As of mid-February, about 900 were PTC ready and BNSF officials expected to reach the 2,000 mark by the year's end.

CSX Corp. has 3,600 locomotives that will require PTC equipment. So far, CSX has partially equipped 2,400 locomotives and fully equipped about 350, says Ken Lewis, director of the Class I's PTC team. The railroad is on target to fully equip the fleet according to schedule. Also moving ahead is CSX's track survey, which involved the use of a helicopter-based "fly-mapping" technology to obtain GPS coordinates.

"We've completed fly-mapping our entire railroad and we've processed about three-quarters of that," says Lewis. "We will continue to finish up data processing this year and start building those subdivision files to actually run PTC."

CSX also is in various stages of upgrading signal equipment along 7,500 miles of track. The wayside effort is a big challenge, with a significant amount of work to be completed, Lewis says, noting the FCC antenna issue. CSX has about 1,100 towers left to install.

The railroad "really hit its stride" with its PTC implementation program last year, Lewis says. Still, it's difficult to say where the program will be by 2015's end, he adds. The Class I's goal is to have at least 20 subdivisions in PTC-revenue service demonstration by then. But in addition to the FCC tower uncertainty, it's not yet known how long the FRA will take to certify the Class Is' safety plans once they're filed.

have to agree with palallin he probably is guilty and probably was speeding I used to ride that train daily and some of the conductors were a lot more aggressive than others but he reads the papers and has seen new coverage (cruise line captain...) he would have to be a moron to talk to police without an attourney

OK, lets look at the KNOWN FACTS, as released by the NTSB so far:

1) The train was markedly above the 80MPH speed limit prior to the 50MPH curve.

2) The train was at 106MPH entering the 50MPH curve.

3) The emergency brakes were activated. The event recorder will reflect were that emergency activation was initiated from, i.e. the Engineer's position, or a "Conductor's valve" back on the train.

4) After emergency brake activation, the locomotive apparently left the tracks, at 102MPH at which point the event recorder stopped recording.

OT, wonder what its cause was? Excess speed, bad track work?

Seeking knowledge. 

It it has been stated that emergency brakes were applied at or near the entrance to the curve. 

In in a car, heavy braking entering a curve at speed has a good chance of sending the car right off the road (the changing dynamics affecting grip of the tires on the road...a simplified description). I live on a curve and see this happen all too frequently. 

Would the late braking by the engineer increase the risk of accident in this case or have no effect?  Is there a chance that no brakes might have kept the train on the rails or was the speed just too excessive for the curve?

I think it's already been established that excessive speed was the cause. 

The reason for excessive speed hasn't been established.

Rusty

Civil engineering can calculate almost to the MPH the turnover point of a loco or car(s) based on weight, curvature degrees, center of gravity(s), elevation etc.  Its all physics basically.  I am unsure what braking forces would introduce into the equations, but speculate it lowers the turnover point of the cars further.

Rusty

I think rrman was referring to the accident in Spain shown on his posted video and not the AMTRAK accident in Philly

Sorry.  I can't view non-embedded videos from my current location (a.k.a Work.)

If it's the one I'm thinking about, wasn't that due to "distracted operating?"

Rusty

Ok my thougts on this....One the engineer isnt looking good in this situation since he's refusing to talk since he lawyered up...Other thing we need to upgrade all of our rail road tracks...Faze out the wooden rail road ties and repacing them with cement ties with better tracks..Now we have another derailment in Pittsburg..a freight train..

But the main track structure on the Northeast Corridor IS predominantly concrete ties and continuos welded rail, and the track structure thru the curve in question is also concrete ties and CWR.  Your thoughts on THAT?

News outlets are now reporting he can't remember what happened. They are saying he possibly had a concussion from the accident. Interesting...

The lawyer may be provided by the Union given the severity of this derailment.

If you looked at the photos of the locomotive after the crash, someone or something impacted with the right front windshield to shatter the center and bulge it outward.

When I saw it, thought someone's head hit that windshield.

The reason ties age beyond useful life is deferred maintenance, a cost-saving measure, not the fact the wood is a poor choice (for it is not a poor choice).  Where, in an era that must conserve budgetary outflow (thanks in part to what is already too much regulation), are the funds going to come from for recreating the entire rail infrastructure?

Here is a simple fact, folks:  you cannot eliminate accidents.  If it is created by man, it is imperfect.

Check the records to see how many people died that day in traffic accidents.  Boating?  Slipping in the bathtub and drowning?  Medical malpractice?  Combat ops against ISIS?

Trains have derailed since Stevenson's day, and cars have crashed and planes have fallen from the sky.  This wreck needs dispassionate examination, not passion and outcry.

The point is that there is a point of diminishing returns.  As several have noted, it is not remarkable how MANY died in this accident but how FEW.  It is very easy to say that every life is priceless until it comes time to actually pony up the bucks--it's very easy to spend someone else's money.

I am unclear on the crew complement.  How many people are in the cab of these locomotives.  Only the engineer?  Someone commented the conductor is the ultimate person in charge but where is that individual located?  I suspect back with the passengers.  One of the news blogs has the wife of an Amtrak engineer complaining about unreasonable work rules.  Just what are the work rules for the NEC?  Is it unreasonable to expect an engineer to make one round trip from NYC to DC and back?  If yes, please explain.  The wife likened it to driving from NYC to DC and back in rush hour traffic.  I am not finding that comparison valid simply because the engineer does not sit in traffic.  Do they make more than one trip per day?  Are there mandated rest periods like in the airline industry?  If yes what is the time frame.  Someone commented this engineer transferred from the West Coast.  There had to have been an orientation period, anyone know how long that is?  From the sidelines it sure does look like operator error at this point unless someone comes up with a mechanical reason for the loco to simply run away from him.

First, unlike others, I think the smartest thing the engineer could do is lawyer up  Many people would have many less problems if they lawyered up until they know what is going on.  In this case it seems to be the engineer's fault, but then we don't really know that yet.  

Weren't we (media and water cooler talk) all up in arms when a pilot left the cabin to use the head, but in this case it seems there is only one operator supposed to be there?  

Thoughts and prayers are pretty useless here.  I wish better lawyers on the families, and worse lawyers on the railroad.  

The report i heard was that the engineer was taken to the hospital, then to the police station, where he met his lawyer and left without saying anything else.  The statement about not remembering came from the lawyer.  ABC is reporting a further statement from the engineer's lawyer  that he remembers coming into the curve, attempting to reduce speed, then he was knocked out.  He next remembers coming to, taking his cellphone from his bag, and calling 911.

You can assume all kinds of things from smoking gun evidence so far, but the NTSB needs to finish their investigation and let the facts speak for themselves. 

One other factor has apparently gone unreported.  When the engineer was first in the hospital and then in the police station were any tests administered to detect drugs or alcohol?  I thought such procedures were mandatory.

Tony

I wholeheartedly agree that we should let the NTSB sort all this out.  In the meantime there has been a lot of cringe-worthy - if not just plain wrong - coverage of this accident.  One that jumped out at me - and I think someone else earlier in this post - was a statement that there were 224 deaths and over 2000 accidents "last year" on Amtrak - which after even a moments reflection ought to appear incorrect to whomever made that pronouncement.  Turns out that is for the years 2000 to 2014, and this article has a nice summary of these accidents and their breakdown:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/...l/amtrak-casualties/

If you click the 'next' button in the top right corner it will alter the graphics to show the breakdowns by accident type - derail vs vehicle collisions vs collisions with other trains or 'foreign objects'.  The most important statistic - in my view - is that the collisions with vehicles accounts for over 90% of the fatalities and slightly more than half the injuries.  If there was ever any question about the efficacy of separating grade crossings in terms of saving lives, look at the map - as far as I can tell, zero collisions/deaths along the NEC - the most heavily traveled corridor.  Before this recent accident, fatalities associated with derail events numbered 6 for the 2000 to 2014 period - even though it was the most common type of accident on Amtrak.

I haven't dug into these data beyond this article, so it isn't clear to me in which category the train/pedestrian accidents/deaths are accounted for - but its a problem here in the SF Bay Area along both the Caltrain and the Capitol Corridor routes.  Several deaths per year - some apparently suicide by train.  Both ROW's are very accessible, many grade crossings, etc.

According to his lawyer, the engineer has fifiteen-staples in his head (from hitting the windshield?), stiches in his leg, and the other leg immobilized. Also a blood sample was drawn for a drug/alcohol test.

The photos of the locomotive show a damaged windshield on the engineer's side of the cab, so it seems likely he struck it. The reported concussion and head stitches would also support this conclusion.

Hopefully, the NTSB will sort out the human and mechanical factors and produce a FACTUAL, EVIDENCED-BASED account of this incident.

Deaths per year are inversely related to how much attention we pay to them.  Disregarding normal mortality (old age; cancer) we probably kill more folks on the highway than any other way.  Nobody seems to care.  Gun deaths are second, with around 32,000 per year.  The NRA will tell you that only 1000 of those are innocent bystanders, but that is still a really big number compared to Amtrak passenger deaths per year.

Maybe 50 police officers per year are killed in the line of duty.  Each one is afforded a national ceremony with lots of pomp and circumstance.  And murders by Islamic extremists are somewhere below six per year ( not counting 9/11) and they have us positively petrified.  We are more concerned with them than any other form of mortality.

Opinion, of course.

Wait, what? I thought media speculation and public opinion were the truth... (heavy sarcasm) Also, I'm not talking about any opinions in this thread. I am only talking about the articles from the major news agencies and the comments sections linked to the articles. I have enjoyed reading the opinions in this thread and find it interesting.

Yes, the ignorance of the media and the general public regarding railroading and its terminology is on salient display for all to see! 

A brick thrown? - an interesting speculation! Unfortunately, brick and rock throwing at trains in some urban areas is not an uncommon occurrence.

Also, was the windshield broken INWARDS? 

Lots of questions still to be answered......

The same reporter has to sound like an 'expert' on RRs today, Women's rugby tomorrow, labor laws for minors the following day, and dog breeds the following week. They can't be experts at all of that stuff.

No expert on front end design on commuter locos, but since trains habitually hit

assorted idiots, deer, livestock, Minis, and eighteen wheelers, I would hope that

a brick thrown would have little consequence to the cab.  Dunno what kind of glass

they put in them, but I would think it would be bulletproof.  You used to hear about

geese and other birds crashing through aircraft windshields, but I haven't heard

of that lately, including in the famous landing on the Hudson, which was I think was caused by birds being sucked into engines.  I have not read of cockpit windshield damage in that instance.  I would think locos today would have windshields at least up to the technology of commercial aircraft, unless that, too, is a budget short-sheeting.

With all due respect.... who cares if a brick was thrown, unless it penetrated the windshield and knocked the engineer unconscious.  It's not like a car where it would cause one to lose control of the vehicle.  Also does nothing to account for the speed, or other issues leading to the wreck.

Good point. Remember also, the speed PRIOR to the 50MPH curve was 80MPH, i.e. NOT 106MPH.

Speaking of head end damages, the new Cascades trainset being used in the Pacific Northwest has me worried. The cab on one end is crazy low to the tracks:

No idea what's going to happen if this engine squares off against a dup truck full of rocks. I sadly anticipate a very short lifespan for anyone in the cab in such a case. It's several feet lower than any normal cab.

They only have the one head end like this in service for now. I can't believe the unions didn't go nuts when they found the head-end crew would be sitting this low on a train going over 70 MPH...

I imagine there was all manner of stuff flying in all directions once the locomotive left the rails at around 100mph.  Plus, there's all sorts of dynamics involved as the carbody twists, bends and breaks as it come grinding to a halt.

This ain't like in the movies...

Rusty