Gee, wasn't there a thread a little while ago, complaining about the use of abbreviations?
Why are you guys jumping all over Eddie?
C W Burfle posted:Gee, wasn't there a thread a little while ago, complaining about the use of abbreviations?
Why are you guys jumping all over Eddie?
Hmmmm....
Reflecting on general 'Forum Decorum' through the years, these are rhetorical questions, C.W....Right?......sadly, of course.
jim pastorius posted:Where are the beautiful streamliners of years gone by ?? These new trains are UGLY. That Siemens Charger lost some sheet metal going through the trees but looked pretty straight sitting on the lo boy.
That's a discussion for a different thread. The design makes no difference in regard to this disaster. An E, F or PA doing 80 through a 30mph curve would have left the tracks just the same.
Rusty
totrainyard posted:PTC = Positive Train Control
PST = Pacific Standard Time
PTS = Points
You missed one - PAT = Point after touchdown 😉
Curt
I'm sorry if this has been discussed, but is this dark territory or is this signalled territory?
Paul
It was signaled. If you check some of the derailment site photos on the TRAINS Magazine website; you can see what appear to be the remains of a wayside signal mast.
Curt
smd4 posted:eddie g posted:I have ridden more long distance trains in the last 3 years than you have in your life. I'm 87, I do forget sometimes.
Yeah, probably not.
I'm guessing HW has probably ridden more long distance trains than in two of your lifetimes.
I hope it makes you feel real good to beat up on a 87 year old.....
Gregg posted:smd4 posted:eddie g posted:I have ridden more long distance trains in the last 3 years than you have in your life. I'm 87, I do forget sometimes.
Yeah, probably not.
I'm guessing HW has probably ridden more long distance trains than in two of your lifetimes.
I hope it makes you feel real good to beat up on a 87 year old.....
Well, in my opinion, "eddie g" certainly leaves himself wide open for such feedback, what with so many of his inane posts all over the OGR forums, 87 years old or not.
Gregg posted:smd4 posted:eddie g posted:I have ridden more long distance trains in the last 3 years than you have in your life. I'm 87, I do forget sometimes.
Yeah, probably not.
I'm guessing HW has probably ridden more long distance trains than in two of your lifetimes.
I hope it makes you feel real good to beat up on a 87 year old.....
I Don't think that it was intended as "Beating Up On" an 87 year old. Seeing HW had a very Loooong career with EMD, I seriously doubt that Eddie has ridden more LD trains in the last 3 years, than HW has in his lifetime.
I Have personally seen Eddie's Ornery side on the 3 rail forum, and feel his comment was just as antagonistic.
I Don't know HW or SMD's exact age, but AFAIK, both are retired from Railroad related careers, and while I don't believe either is 87, neither is a teen, or twenty something "picking on" an old man.
given the knowledge that both contribute to the forum, myself I willingly give them a little slack, as I have learned LOT from both.
Doug
challenger3980 posted:I Don't know HW or SMD's exact age, but AFAIK, both are retired from Railroad related careers, and while I don't believe either is 87, neither is a teen, or twenty something "picking on" an old man.
In the interest of truthfulness, I've never worked for a railroad, or ever been involved in main line operations. I've been a qualified steam locomotive fireman for a tourist railroad since 2010, and am in my 50s.
Been following this thread but haven't had much time to contribute to it until now. The facts of what happened as they are known is that the train was doing 80mph in a 30mph and that (so far) not other contributing factors have been found, doesn't appear the throttle was stuck, or that any attempt was made to brake the train. So it appears (note the key word appears) based on what is known so far, that it looks like human error.
Using that assumption, then the question boils down into a debate on why it happened, what could have prevented it, etc.
Blaming the engineer is all great and good, if the assumption this is totally human error is true (and so far it looks like that, based on what we have), but while that makes some people happy to say "throw him in jail", "sue the railroads", and other punitive things, it is basically useless in terms of long term impact IMO, when human error happens people aren't thinking "Gee, if the train crashes I could go to jail" or someone who runs a company and refuses to spend money on improvements that could prevent accidents and such, consequences like that are not very good deterrents to human failures of any kind. The GM managers who in the late 80's who told researchers that defects with new cars needing to be fixed after purchase were "no big deal, part of the cost of doing business, it is why we have warranty service", really thought that way, despite the fact they were bleeding market share to cars perceived as being better, and ultimate went from 40% market share to 25% share, a significant consequence they already could have seen coming. I have seen in other threads (not on here) arguing that if PTC was really needed, the train companies would have implemented it a long time ago (in response to people talking about the benefits of it), therefore it isn't needed, but that has the view that somehow management operates rationally and with the best interests of the business, which isn't really true all the time.
Then there was the debate about PTC. PTC is not, as some said, some sort of super sophisticated system coming out of some mystical lab, it is as I understand it a pretty basic feedback and control system. With GPS being a widespread technology, and that trains/engines are connected to the outside world, and are like most things computer assisted or controlled to a certain extent, the ability for an outside system to spot problems on the train, and issue a command to it to slow down or stop or issue a warning to the engineer, is not exactly rocket science, this is not sophisticated engineering by any means (the command control engines we enjoy in three rail are a pretty good analogy to the real thing, and you could build basically ptc system on our toy trains by interfacing DCS or Legacy via bluetooth to an application running on a computer or a smartphone).
The reason PTC has not been applied universally is therefore not a technical challenge, it is one of money and resources. I don't know exactly how much it costs on some basis (per mile, per dollar of revenue, etc) to implement such a system, but I am sure it is not small. Likely with this Amtrak line (kind of ironic, given that federal regulations were supposed to require PTC), cost is pretty much the reason why this 'newfangled technology' as it was called in a thread on here at some point, has not been adopted. The railroads balk at the cost, and basically figure the cost of not having it is likely not going to be as much as it costs, so they fight against it, delay it. Politicians, not wanting to be seen as 'anti business' put pressure on regulators to back off, allow delays (and same politicians, when something like this happens, blame the engineer, blame the railroad, blame not having PTC, but of course stay mum about their part in why it isn't in place)
Is technology perfect? Someone on this thread talked about how technological solutions where he works cost a lot, end up eroding productivity, etc, but that is another discussion, technology and automation in those cases generally fail because they were misapplied. GM In the 1980's spent 16 billion on something called MAP and robotics, claiming that would solve their problems, and it didn't, because that automation wasn't the root of the problem. I would argue given what PTC is, and some of the stats I have seen on it where it was implemented about prevented incidents based on PTC vs non PTC controlled regions, that it has proven itself. Will PTC prevent every accident? No technology can do that, PTC systems can have blind spots in them, they can fail for a variety of reasons,etc, but it certainly can reduce accidents down to where when one happens, it will be really notable, the way major airline crashes currently are (as compared to planes being late, stuck on the tarmac for many hours, etc, which is all too common).
Someone else mentioned PTC as an unfunded government mandate, but that is an incorrect term for it. Unfunded mandate could apply here (where we are talking a government entity, ie Amtrak), since mandates are government to government, but PTC with private railroads is a regulation that the government has no particular reason to pay for, regulations are put in place and industry is supposed to comply. The reason regulations happen is often because industry doesn't see the cost of not implementing whatever it is, and are often shocked that something put in by law ends up benefitting them that they were blind to. The knuckle coupler and the air brake were fought tooth and nail by the railroads and only came into widespread use thanks to congress in 1890 requiring them, and it was responsible in more than a small part of the golden age of trains. Through congress, the fledgeling airline industry was given both a kind of subsidy (mail service), but they also were regulated for safety, despite the opposition of the industry, and created airplane travel that was seen as safe, which allowed it to bloom. The auto industry claimed the pollution regulations were going to 'put them out of business', as were the safety regulations, yet it was because of those regulations in a direct line that we have the cars we do today, that last eons longer, are more powerful, safer, take less maintainence, than anything on the road pre those regulations, but the industry couldn't see that (and for all our sakes, thanks to the catalytic converter used for NOx emissions, got rid of lead in gasoline that was only banned by the EPA in 1980, well after all cars were using catalytic converters,despite their being proof since the late 40's of how badly our environment was fouled with lead.). My guess is PTC will ultimately prove to be a boon to the railroads, that they will be able to ship more stuff more quickly, especially in congested regions, and the lack of accidents might also tamper some of the resistance to high speed trains (for example, might allow better sharing of freight lines with passenger service, allowing for faster passenger service), and it likely would prevent the perception, as with this accident, that train service is risky.
I'm curious why there's been no mention of a company official riding the train on its inaugural run? Perhaps a Trainmaster or an instructor of engineman.. (We call them master- mechanics here.). Someone like our forum member number 90...
It's pretty scary stuff. I'm also curious whether VIA has PTC on the Montreal /Toronto corridor.. I don't know.
Sorry HOTWATER, I just read your history. You have ridden on more trains than me.
Gregg posted:I'm curious why there's been no mention of a company official riding the train on its inaugural run? Perhaps a Trainmaster or an instructor of engineman.. (We call them master- mechanics here.). Someone like our forum member number 90...
Technically, this was NOT "the inaugural run", but the first revenue run, i.e. with paying passengers. The officials & dignitaries had already ridden as part of the big ribbon cutting ceremony some days previously. Apparently Amtrak management saw no need for a supervisor to ride the cab, especially since there had been many, many, many weeks of practice/test/training runs over the new by-pass.
As a side note, I wonder how all those folks that have been "demanding" that there should ALWAYS be two people in the cab of EVERY train, feel now? In this case, there WERE two people, i.e. the Engineer, and a promoted Conductor learning the territory!
It's pretty scary stuff. I'm also curious whether VIA has PTC on the Montreal /Toronto corridor.. I don't know.
eddie g posted:Sorry HOTWATER, I just read your history. You have ridden on more trains than me.
Apology accepted. Please remember that it is always best to remain silent, and be thought an idiot,,,,,than to open ones mouth and remove all doubt. Didn't Winston Churchill make that famous quote?
smd4 posted:challenger3980 posted:I Don't know HW or SMD's exact age, but AFAIK, both are retired from Railroad related careers, and while I don't believe either is 87, neither is a teen, or twenty something "picking on" an old man.
In the interest of truthfulness, I've never worked for a railroad, or ever been involved in main line operations. I've been a qualified steam locomotive fireman for a tourist railroad since 2010, and am in my 50s.
Steve, it may have been Number 90, that I was thinking of, not You.
Regardless, the comment about beating up on an 87 year old, was uncalled for, in my opinion
Doug
HOT WATER: While many of us respect your railroad knowledge and wide range of experience, I would respectlfully request, sir, that you seriously dial back the snarkiness in your replies.
OK guys...(you all know who I am talking about)....tone it down a little. We usually let the Real Trains forum have a little more lee way as to comments but no need to adopt the high and might attitudes and negative comments. Sometimes taking a deep breath helps...perhaps a pill or two as well....
Alan
Aw gee... Just when I was going to chime an adult steps in to quell all the fun.
Last year I had the pleasure of riding the high speed train from Barcelona to Madrid. 2 hours and 45 minutes city center to city center (about 350 miles). We had a wonderful hot meal served on china with wine by three staff. We were averaging over 130 mph or higher. The ride was smooth as silk and we did this for $70/person for 1st class. We arrived about 1 mile from our hotel. When Americans have the opportunity to ride TGV or its equivalent in Europe or Asia they return wondering what the heck is our problem. With air travel becoming more onerous every day, I keep waiting for people here to rise to occasion and make city to city rail travel a thing of great pleasure and efficiency.
Seriously?!?!?
There was a passenger train derailment DRILL taking place at the Exact same time that this happened.
Give me a break.
SPSF posted:Seriously?!?!?
There was a passenger train derailment DRILL taking place at the Exact same time that this happened.
Give me a break.
I only find this story on conspiracy websites. Until someone can show something more conclusive than that, I won't believe it.
Deuce posted:SPSF posted:Seriously?!?!?
There was a passenger train derailment DRILL taking place at the Exact same time that this happened.
Give me a break.
I only find this story on conspiracy websites. Until someone can show something more conclusive than that, I won't believe it.
Well, believe it or not, there was indeed a major "emergency responders exercise" going on at the near-by JBLM military base (Joint Base Lewis McCord), and the Army hospital there has been caring for MANY of the injured. One of the only truly "lucky" incidences of that whole disaster.
Gregg posted:I'm curious why there's been no mention of a company official riding the train on its inaugural run? Perhaps a Trainmaster or an instructor of engineman.. (We call them master- mechanics here.). Someone like our forum member number 90...
It's pretty scary stuff. I'm also curious whether VIA has PTC on the Montreal /Toronto corridor.. I don't know.
Greg, I was curious also...there was a report that in the cab was an engineer and a trainee learning the route. Could be a seasoned veteran getting qualified but I just don't know.
Paul
Railrunnin posted:Gregg posted:I'm curious why there's been no mention of a company official riding the train on its inaugural run? Perhaps a Trainmaster or an instructor of engineman.. (We call them master- mechanics here.). Someone like our forum member number 90...
It's pretty scary stuff. I'm also curious whether VIA has PTC on the Montreal /Toronto corridor.. I don't know.
Greg, I was curious also...there was a report that in the cab was an engineer and a trainee learning the route. Could be a seasoned veteran getting qualified but I just don't know.
Paul
The second person that was in the cab was a promoted Conductor, that was becoming familiar on THAT route.
I saw a TV report a couple of weeks ago that the new Sonoma Marin Area Rapid Transit (SMART) service which just opened has PTC implemented system wide. The reporter mentioned that the PTC system cost was $1 million per mile. I think that this cost is excessive but I can't back it up with facts either way. Sometimes the cost of something includes stuff that most people would not consider part of the project. For example, part of the police chief's salary in my town was included in the animal shelter budget even though the chief had no interaction with shelter for years.
SMART serves the area north of San Francisco. It was built on the old Northwest Pacific (SP) right of way. It runs a modern version of the old Budd Rail Diesel Cars (RDC).
Here is a link to the SMART train site: http://sonomamarintrain.org
NH Joe
So if the NTSB findings are excessive speed on curve, what will happen to the engineer and the trainee? Could their fate be like Brandon Bostian?
Speaking of whom, on September 12, 2017, Philadelphia Municipal Court Judge Thomas Gehret dismissed all charges against Bostian
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...hia_train_derailment
I would at least hope the moron Bostian would never be allowed to operate a train again.
A speed limit reduction from 79 to 30 is quite a differential. One would have to be very distracted, or disabled, not to perceive that the train was going that many MPH faster than allowed. One wonders how much warning, in the form of signage or signals, was installed to warn of such a significant change in speed limit.
Let's forget PTC for a moment. I admit that I do not know the exact terms of the equipment used on the NYC subway system, but having been a subway fan and rider for 65 years, I do know that there is a compressed air system along the track, and that there are timed, speed-restricting block signals at certain places along the ROW, (generally at the entrance to stations, or on steep downhill sections of track,) and that these signals remain "red" until and unless a motorman reduces his train's speed in advance of these signals. If he does not, an automatic, mechanical device (I believe called a "key") attached to the truck, just ahead of the front wheel, will strike a movable metal arm, located just outside the running rail. The arm is raised when the signal is red, and retracts when the signal clears. The interaction of these two metal parts puts the train into emergency braking if the motorman attempts to pass a red signal. If the motorman times his deceleration properly, the signals (and the brake arm device) allow the train to proceed. I have seen experienced motormen decelerate exactly at the proper speed, always braking smoothly, and passing the keys just as they retract.
The LIRR has some sort of interactive signalling system, of which I have been aware since at least the 1970's. A motorman in electrified territory must acknowledge a signal in a certain amount of time, or the train brakes apply automatically.
While I understand that PTC is an expensive project, it would seem that to put some sort of relatively simple device, as described above, at certain places where the speed limit changes abruptly, would be a good start. Then expand the system eventually to include places with less abrupt speed limit changes and at other decision points. Implementing this technique, one step at a time, prioritizing the locations, is better than waiting until a universal solution is ready to be installed.
The past few events that have killed people, namely the Metro North event, the New Jersey event, the derailment in Philadelphia, and now this one, all have one thing in common. They could have been avoided had the ROW been equipped with speed sensors and a method of setting the train brake from outside the engineer's/motorman's area of control.
The fight to reinstate criminal charges against the engineer in a deadly 2015 Amtrak derailment in Philadelphia will carry over into next year.
Source: Philadelphia, The Morning Call - December 20, 2017 - 4:00 PM
Click here to read the article.
This could be a benchmark case for the State of Washington. (Speculation)
Gary
Attachments
That sounds like the drunk telling the cop he had to drive home, because he was too drunk to walk. Or telling the cop you didn't see the school zone signs because you were going so fast they were blurred.
No explanation works for going that fast in a 30 zone.
Train control has been around for decades, nearly a century, since the Great Western Railway of The united Kingdom put it in during the 1920's. (it was a simple circuit that automatically activated the engines breaks and cut the throttle if it over ran a point if I recall correctly, huge innovation at the time) I recall the difference between the new and old systems (the acronyms elude me) and after watching from the NOVA program on "why trains crash", and reading a few years ago is the new system has more features, that are not yet available, but only a two millisecond difference in response time. The lack of noticeably quicker response was why they originally saw no point, or at least in the news pieces I read. The main issue I keep seeing over and over again is not enough people, getting rid of the fireman in the cab with the engineer was a really terrible idea. Yes, there could be lapses in attention, but it also made it so there were two overlapping attention spans on the train making a slip up easy to catch. Japan seems to see having properly staffed and maintained rail as a top priority, we seem to have the overly aggressive stance that the bottom lines matter no matter what, even if it means you harm your self doing so. I understand business need to make a profit, but not at the cost of lives being thrown away from being" a penny saved and a pound short". Looking at that stretch of track i see a type of catch points being a really go idea, then you can chose where the train goes in an accident, and bring it to a overall safer stop.
That is my two bits.
Pray for tall who have been afflicted by it.
GVDobler posted:I would at least hope the moron Bostian would never be allowed to operate a train again.
A co-worker of mine knows Bostian personally. He was a railfan, very conscientious about his work and very enthusiastic about railroading in general. He reports that Bostian is personally destroyed by that wreck. It's doubtful that he could even bring himself to watch a train go by, much less ever get into the cab.
It is a pity that he suffers but I imagine some of the victim's families suffer too. There is a responsibility in a job like that regardless of enthusiasm etc. Same for all these accidents.
There were two people who were able to fly an Air Canada plane's cockpit and it almost landed onto FOUR fully loaded planes on a SFO taxiway. (Captain and First Officer)
On the railroading side there was the head on in the Texas Panhandle on the BNSF. Each had two crew members.
There was a recent article in TRAINS where a UP official placed a red fuse along the track, and the train did not stop. Only a student crew member asked it the train should stop.
So having a second person in the cab by itself does not make a safe situation. In fact it might make it unsafe if the two do not get along.
jim pastorius posted:It is a pity that he suffers but I imagine some of the victim's families suffer too. There is a responsibility in a job like that regardless of enthusiasm etc. Same for all these accidents.
Very true. Regardless of intent, sometimes our mistakes cause serious harm. Our regret does not absolve us of the consequences of our missteps. Or at least, it shouldn't.
jim pastorius posted:It is a pity that he suffers but I imagine some of the victim's families suffer too. There is a responsibility in a job like that regardless of enthusiasm etc. Same for all these accidents.
Agreed......My wife is the head nurse in the local ER....not a place you can make a lot of errors either. Plenty of jobs that are not life and death....but if you pick one that is....you have to be responsible.
There is an issue with using GPS with PTC. In areas with high buildings, the radio signals bounce around, and reduce the accuracy of the signals. LRT is not freight, commuter or intercity rail. But this signal bounce is one of the reasons Houston METRO did not use a GPS PTC operating system.
There are "off the self" systems to stop a train if it passes a signal that tells the engineer to stop. But a system to oversee speed at all times brings a higher complexity to the issues. A constantly moving chess board.
Just saw an article on the Wall Street Journal page that says the original plans for the Washington (not DC) rail line called for the elimination of the curve where the wreck occurred but it was too expensive. So they put a $10 sign up and made the speed limit 30MPH.
Is it possible to just raise the outside rail higher? I know they do, but I mean much higher like a race track. I also wonder if this curve had any bank to it.
