Huh?
cjack posted:That’s not true. NTSB said the TRAIN was going 80 mph.
Yes, going 80 when it was last 'pinged' by the system that records on-board speeds. The problem is nobody at this moment can say exactly where the train was when it last pinged. It could have miles up the line, anywhere between Dupont and Lakewood (or further, considering how fast it's expected to go) at the moment the 80MPH was pinged. Those systems (which can be tracked online through a few websites) update every few minutes and aren't always the most reliable means of determining speed or location. They work great when you're waiting for an Amtrak train trackside with a camera (or wanting to know if you're going to be late to the depot to board it), but they're hardly the end-all for an accident investigation.
This is just like after a car crash, one driver will usually accuse the other (normally the one with the right of way) of speeding, but without some means to record it at that moment, the layman cannot judge speed just by watching something. if they could, we wouldn't need radar guns for cops, would we? Sure, the lateral force on the curve caused the train to attempt to take I-5 to Olympia, but there is a serious question on what that speed really was, and more importantly, what caused said speed.
- Crew not going correct speed?
- Bad instructions to the head end crew?
- Problems with the equipment?
- Poor training for the route?
- Brakes not working to slow the train on a wet day as opposed to earlier runs on dry track, using the conditions that worked well during the dry summer?
Don't rule out any of them at this point. We'll find out soon enough.
Meanwhile, one of my friends is in surgery. That's all I really care about.
p51 posted:cjack posted:That’s not true. NTSB said the TRAIN was going 80 mph.
Yes, going 80 when it was last 'pinged' by the system that records on-board speeds.
Not sure what you mean by "pinged", as the event recorders in today's diesel are continuous recording devices and also record when the horn is used, when the bell is used, when the radio is used, when the automatic air brake is used, when the independent air brake is used, throttle position, load and dynamic brake effort levels, etc. All the investigators need to do is download all the data, and compare it to the mile post locations, and they will be able to tell EVERYTHING the person operating the train did, and exactly when he/she did it.
Hot Water posted:New Haven Joe posted:First, PTC was NEVER intended to be functional within terminals, such as the huge Hoboken terminal. Way too many tracks, and the speed limit is 10 MPH anyway.
Second, the Engineer of that NJ Transit train WAS entering at a speed of 10 MPH. However, the in cab video showed that he subsequently "slumped over" (fell asleep) the controller, thus increasing the throttle and train speed to over 30 MPH. Again, PTC would NOT have been capable of preventing THAT!
I haven't heard of about any serious accidents with loss of life in yards during the past few years. NH Joe
My understanding is that a PTC system is supposed to override the engineer's input when the train exceeds the speed limit. If this is true, a PTC system would have prevented the NJ train from exceeding the 10 mph speed yard limit even if the engineer had a medical emergency which caused him to push the throttle forward.
A well designed PTC system should be able to limit speed in any yard even if can't tell which track the train is on. This would have caused the train to hit the bumper at 10 instead of 30 mph. This would have significantly reduced the damage and perhaps prevented the one death.
NH Joe
New Haven Joe posted:Hot Water posted:New Haven Joe posted:First, PTC was NEVER intended to be functional within terminals, such as the huge Hoboken terminal. Way too many tracks, and the speed limit is 10 MPH anyway.
Second, the Engineer of that NJ Transit train WAS entering at a speed of 10 MPH. However, the in cab video showed that he subsequently "slumped over" (fell asleep) the controller, thus increasing the throttle and train speed to over 30 MPH. Again, PTC would NOT have been capable of preventing THAT!
I haven't heard of about any serious accidents with loss of life in yards during the past few years. NH Joe
My understanding is that a PTC system is supposed to override the engineer's input when the train exceeds the speed limit. If this is true, a PTC system would have prevented the NJ train from exceeding the 10 mph speed yard limit even if the engineer had a medical emergency which caused him to push the throttle forward. PTC could limit speed in any yard even if can't tell which track the train is on.
NH Joe
NH Joe - your point is NOT valid about PTC for preventing the Hoboken Terminal incident since there is NO PTC installed within the terminal trackage. The thinking here is the terminal trackage speed limit is 10 mph and that is sufficient for normal operations. Why wasn't PTC added to terminal trackage? Most likely it was felt the cost outweighed the benefits given the 10 mph speed limit. All of this is Monday morning quarterbacking as in "should have done this or that". That is one the reasons the NTSB investigates these incidents - if they feel changes are recommended to existing rules and/or operating practices it will be stated in the report. This is how we got PTC - it was the result of a couple of passenger train incidents a few years ago where it was felt a system like PTC would be a solution to prevent such incidents from occurring again. I remind you where this Amtrak Talgo derailed PTC is to be implemented - just was not finished and active to prevent this particular incident unfortunately.
We now have diesel locomotives equal in HP to three F Units. This is on two axles vs six on the F. Is this too much HP on two axles? My guess is that the NTSB will look at this.
I hope the diesel and pure electric Siemens locomotives will not become the SDP40F's of this century.
Dominic Mazoch posted:We now have diesel locomotives equal in HP to three F Units. This is on two axles vs six on the F. Is this too much HP on two axles? My guess is that the NTSB will look at this.
A TOTALLY irrelevant "guess"!
I hope the diesel and pure electric Siemens locomotives will not become the SDP40F's of this century.
Again, TOTALLY irrelevant, since the SDP40F units were VERY heavy, not designed for "high speed" passenger service anyway, and and to pull poorly maintained, light weight baggage cars coupled directly behind the SDP40F unit/units.
Dominic Mazoch posted:We now have diesel locomotives equal in HP to three F Units. This is on two axles vs six on the F. Is this too much HP on two axles? My guess is that the NTSB will look at this.
I hope the diesel and pure electric Siemens locomotives will not become the SDP40F's of this century.
Seems to me that three F unit's would have 12 axles with traction motors vs. a Charger's 4 axles with traction motors...
Unless I've miscounted somewhere.
Rusty
See HW's post-not relevant.
I'm not ready to send the Siemen's Chargers to the scrap heap of history because of one tragic accident very likely caused by human error.
Rusty
Hot Water posted:Dominic Mazoch posted:We now have diesel locomotives equal in HP to three F Units. This is on two axles vs six on the F. Is this too much HP on two axles? My guess is that the NTSB will look at this.
A TOTALLY irrelevant "guess"!
I hope the diesel and pure electric Siemens locomotives will not become the SDP40F's of this century.
Again, TOTALLY irrelevant, since the SDP40F units were VERY heavy, not designed for "high speed" passenger service anyway, and and to pull poorly maintained, light weight baggage cars coupled directly behind the SDP40F unit/units.
If the performance of the ACS-64 to date is any indication of Siemens quality, I highly doubt that would be an issue. All indications are they are a worthy successor to the AEM7 and GG1 that came before and the ACS-64 has 8,600 hp and a higher daily service speed. The SDP40F is a poor comparison at best. Different era, different mission.
However to say so at this point in time is pure speculation which is how a majority of this thread has read. I am all for grieving the loss of life, hope for quick healing for those injured, and nothing but the best towards a crew that has been through a traumatic event. The rest will sort itself out through careful investigation. Appropriate changes will be made which is sadly the normal outcome after a tragic event and not before.
Latest new FACTS from NTSB briefing minutes ago:
1. Event recorders recovered from both locos. Rear unit recorder confirms train at 80 mph at time of derailment. Inward & outward facing cameras recovered from the lead unit, but are damaged & being sent to Wash. DC to try to recover the memories.
2 There were 2 persons in the lead engine. Besides the engineer, there was a conductor-in-training on a ride along for route familiarization.
3. Rails at accident site are intact, not turned outward. Ties do show marks indicating wheel points of departure.
4. Emergency braking was not initiated by the engineer, but by the accident itself.
Just for fun, go to RAILpictures.NET and there is a photo of the rear loco from the back. You can see the rails, the curve and down the hill where the front of the train went. Also to the far right there is a big gouge in the dirt hillside that looks like it was made by the front loco and cars. If so, the train looks like it climbed the rails before the curve and crashed through the brush and trees. the rails appear to be in their original place.
Big Mike G,
Looks like 80 MPH in a 30 MPH track zone, what a mess!
PCRR/Dave
If the train was going 80 in a 30 zone, who is to blame? If there were more than one person in the cab, how would they not all be to blame?
What am I missing? Are trains run like airlines used to be, where nobody could question the captain? Those days should be long gone. Today you have to bring your driving record to an airline interview. If you have a ticket, the interview is over.
Although post-accident speculation is interesting, we best wait for the NTSB professionals to complete their report.
Sure looks that way Dave! I want to see how they load that engine on a lowboy! Or 2!
Tin Plate Art,
Unfortunately that initial report came from the NTSB investigator who got the information directly from the engine safety recording devise. 3 Dead what a bummer.
Eddie,
President Trump does not allocate money for the Railroads, it is done by Congress same as with the military.
PCRR/Dave
Latest information from NTSB: event recorder data shows that the BRAKES WERE NOT APPLIED PRIOR TO THE TRAIN LEAVING THE RSILS. Thus indicating that emergency brakes were applied as a result of the derailment, and not from the controlling locomotive brake valve.
Hot Water posted:Latest information from NTSB: event recorder data shows that the BRAKES WERE NOT APPLIED PRIOR TO THE TRAIN LEAVING THE RSILS. Thus indicating that emergency brakes were applied as a result of the derailment, and not from the controlling locomotive brake valve.
It just gets worse and worse......what happened and why??? Thx
AMCDave posted:Hot Water posted:Latest information from NTSB: event recorder data shows that the BRAKES WERE NOT APPLIED PRIOR TO THE TRAIN LEAVING THE RSILS. Thus indicating that emergency brakes were applied as a result of the derailment, and not from the controlling locomotive brake valve.
It just gets worse and worse......what happened and why??? Thx
Those two are the $64,000 dollar questions!
Hot Water posted:Those two are the $64,000 dollar questions!
/as a retired Sr Analyst for a top 5 worldwide bank.....things like this bug me....add to it the almost 10K miles a year I ride Amtrak. I understand we have to wait for the incident to be fully investigated.....but I also understand all the 'I want answers now' attitude. We want a clear and easy somewhat logical reason for the accident. Metal failure, act of nature unforeseen etc. We don't want to hear that someone fell down on the job and killed people and caused this much destruction. Kinda human nature I think.
GVDobler posted:... Today you have to bring your driving record to an airline interview. If you have a ticket, the interview is over.
categorically untrue. DWI/DUI and license suspensions are the only things that are considered. i know of no pilots who have never gotten a speeding ticket. frankly, the FAA will be contacting you as a private pilot if they see a suspension (typically a consequence of a DWI/DUI anyway) occur, so even non-commercial pilots need to keep that part of their record clean.
cheers...gary
Attachments
This is for Hot Water. were you fireman on the 2011 run to Tacoma? If so did the run up take the track where the accident happened or the bypass since you had passenger? Thank you and hate how it happened. This is the second derailment the Cascade has had in a few months
After watching the video at the link Gary posted, wondering this: if the conductor on a passenger train notices that the train is exceeding the limits for a segment of track, does he or she have the authority to initiate a brake application? Or the means to do it? I mean this as a general question, though it was of course brought to mind by this incident. I'm sure the conductor has plenty going on.
Thanks,
David
I wonder how many times the engineer had a change to practice the run, especially in dark and and wet conditions. How was visibility and the signage for the speed limits. The train was late, was their added pressure to be on time. I feel sick about the whole thing especially the loss of life and injuries.
If the train is traveling at an obviously unsafe speed or in an emergency ANYONE on the train has the authority to initiate an emergency brake application. You better be sure it's an emergency though. I have done so on two ocasions as a passenger when a woman was caught in the doors and being dragged on the platform and this was not noticed by the conductor. Just before I pulled the brake handle a busybody passenger got up, grabbed by coat, and yelled "don't touch that! It's only for the conductor". She would have died if we did not stop. The second time an elderly woman slipped moving between cars at South Ferry, and I initiated an emergency brake application. Common sense dictates use of a train emergency brake.
Thanks, Tommy. I meant to specify long-distance (Amtrak or other), rather than commuter/subway, if that makes any difference. I ride the NYC subway to work, and I see the brake handles there (along with signs saying not to use them). I'm less familiar with long-distance trains. David
Edit: Here's more info from the MTA site, which sort of contradicts what I've seen posted in the cars, at least going by my memory:
Using the Emergency Cord
Use the emergency cord only to prevent an accident or injury. For example, if someone gets caught between closing subway car doors and is being dragged, pull the cord. But if your train is between stations and someone aboard becomes ill, do not pull the emergency cord. The train will stop, preventing medical professionals from reaching the sick passenger. A sick person is better off if the train goes to the nearest station where police and medical services will be waiting or can be quickly summoned, without interruption.
This was years ago when the brakes were controlled by an easily accessible red wooden handle. Now some idiot in the transit authority put the brake controls behind a glass door. If this had been the situation then she would have died. The motor stopped six inches before she would have been cut in two by the safety gate at the end of the platform. At the time the trains could move with doors open. It's kind of funny. I didn't even have to get on that train. It wasn't going where I wanted. Some voice told me "get on that train". Yes. It was a voice. It was almost supernatural. It repeated those words twice. And when I was inside the car I asked myself "why am on this train". Those traction motors were pulling amps and we were accelerating rapidly. Then she began to scream and I knew why i was on that train at that point in the space-time continuum Maybe there is a god.
Brewman1973 posted:I wonder how many times the engineer had a chance to practice the run, especially in dark and and wet conditions. ...
before i fly anywhere, i take the flight on MS Flight Simulator, believe it's in version 10 now, but mine is fairly old... with terrain, airports, navaids/ radio frequencies, etc that are remarkably accurate. i can even change the weather & visibility and simulate instrument failures. when i take the actual flight, it's like one continuous deja-vu.
if MS could do this for < $50 (it's even cheaper now), it's hard to imagine AmTrak wouldn't have a simulator. compared to pitch, roll and yaw... forward and reverse seem kinda simple.
One article I read yesterday said that two of the people killed were rail fans.
Information about the two fellows can be found in this NY Daily News article.
Tommy posted:If the train is traveling at an obviously unsafe speed or in an emergency ANYONE on the train has the authority to initiate an emergency brake application.
So, being that in a coach you cannot see the track ahead--curves, signals, grade crossings, etc., please tell me how in the heck you--as a passenger--are going to make the determination that the speed is "obviously unsafe?"
cabrala18 posted:This is for Hot Water. were you fireman on the 2011 run to Tacoma?
Don't recall going to Tacoma in 2011. We doubleheader with UP 844 in 2007 (if I remember correctly).
If so did the run up take the track where the accident happened or the bypass since you had passenger?
No, as that trackage/line was former Northern Pacific and not yet "up-graded" for passenger service, that far back. We have always used the double track main line whenever we have gone to Seattle, or north to Canada.
Thank you and hate how it happened. This is the second derailment the Cascade has had in a few months
C W Burfle posted:One article I read yesterday said that two of the people killed were rail fans.
Information about the two fellows can be found in this NY Daily News article.
To be fair, the two gentlemen were really "Rail Activist", and VERY involved in promoting passenger rail. Thus, in my opinion, they were much more than just "railfans".
The NTSB has to go through the investigation, as it should, but if you look at that curve from behind the rear engine, there is no way an 80MPH train is going to make it. Not sure I would want to do it in a car. They talk about installing "speed control", I thought that was what the engineer was for. In the last couple of years there have been too many accidents by speeding passenger trains on curves. Better qualified and trained crew members seem to be needed AND no cover-ups.
GVDobler posted:... Today you have to bring your driving record to an airline interview. If you have a ticket, the interview is over.
Where do some of you people get your so-called "facts?" This is absolutely, totally, unequivocally WRONG!
I am a Commercial Pilot. I make a nice second income flying aircraft. I've had a few pilot employment interviews in my life. I have NEVER, EVER been asked to bring my driving record to an interview.
The FAA regs allow require me to submit all my driving infractions to the FAA on my Medical Exam application each year. Since my driving record is always cross-checked in this process, I have to be truthful about it. If you omit a driving violation, you're toast. However, the ONLY thing in your driving record that is considered disqualifying is a DUI. Speeding tickets mean nothing.
So is the Talgo "Toast"?
Will the Charger be Rebuilt?
prrhorseshoecurve posted:So is the Talgo "Toast"?
Time of the totally destroyed cars, probably yes.
Will the Charger be Rebuilt?
I should thing so, depending on the condition of the underframe structure.
I expect this will be unpopular but so be it, LA Metro engineer texting resulting in a crash, NJ transit, engineer exceed speed limit and crashes into Hoboken, Amtrak NorthEast Corridor, engineer loses situational awareness train leaves track, Metro North train exceed speed in a tight turn, engineer has sleep apnea, this incident, too fast for the curve. We can investigate for years, the end result is going to be operator error. The locomotive engineer is charged with monitoring signals and maintaining speed. They are not charged with changing altitudes, managing weather, navigating in 3 dimensions, they have to manage speed. Either the railroads are not training their folks properly or they aren't supervising them once they are in the field but the humans acting in the role of "driver in command" are not up to the task. This was the first revenue run on a new route, it would be reasonable to expect a degree of caution and conservative operation during the early runs. Amtrak has a great deal of explaining to do.
