# Derailment of Cascades #501, DuPont WA, 2017-12-18



## Karl1459

It appears that Cascades 501 derailed with cars off the overpass. This is on or just south of the new bypass. Too soon for reports of injuries. https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/train-derails-from-bridge-onto-interstate-5-near-olympia/


----------



## Bierboy

Described as a "mass casualty" incident...could be bad...more pics in the link below --

http://komonews.com/news/local/derailed-train-falls-off-bridge-onto-i-5-lanes-south-of-tacoma


----------



## Ngotwalt

I don't think this train was supposed to be where it was. I think it was to go around a sweeping right hand curve just north of there, but someone left a switch open.  Train was on correct alignment, using Google Earth I found a different bridge with similar topography and graffiti, but it was the wrong location.

Nick


----------



## Bierboy

AP now saying "injuries and casualties"....looking worse by the minute. And the local residents were NOT happy about the re-routing so Amtrak could utilize speeds up to 79 mph http://komonews.com/news/local/lakewood-mayor-predicts-deadly-accidents-from-high-speed-train-service


----------



## printman2000

Is the locomotive they are showing 181 the lead or trailing unit?

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## crescent-zephyr

Did they ever test talgo equipment on this line?

The Talgo cars are built quite different and wondering if that could have caused this.

Either way, this looks like a seriously tragic accident, and I just hope that somehow the cars that fell were not full of passengers.


----------



## Bierboy

KIRO now reporting fatalities...

And the local Fox affiliate has some video of passenger cars on top of each other...

http://q13fox.com/2017/12/18/train-derails-above-i-5-sb-lanes-shut-down-near-dupont/


----------



## saxman

Bierboy said:


> AP now saying "injuries and casualties"....looking worse by the minute. And the local residents were NOT happy about the re-routing so Amtrak could utilize speeds up to 79 mph http://komonews.com/news/local/lakewood-mayor-predicts-deadly-accidents-from-high-speed-train-service


Looks like Lakewood residents will be screaming even louder, however this wasn't due to a trespasser.


----------



## lo2e

printman2000 said:


> Is the locomotive they are showing 181 the lead or trailing unit?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


I believe trailing - 501 is a southbound train, and 181 was on the northern end of the train.


----------



## Just-Thinking-51

Rail cars on the ground on both side of the track. The forces involved to make the train split and then have the lead cars land on the inside of the curve and the rest of the train side (fly) to the outside of the curve.

Would think the locomore picture is lead.

Report multiple rail authority types on board. Hopefully no riders in the cab.


----------



## frequentflyer

There is picture of a Talgo car upside on the freeway, the roof is collapsed. Not good,



.


----------



## printman2000

Just-Thinking-51 said:


> Rail cars on the ground on both side of the track. The forces involved to make the train split and then have the lead cars land on the inside of the curve and the rest of the train side (fly) to the outside of the curve.
> 
> Would think the locomore picture is lead, otherwise the laws of physics do not apply.


I think it is trailing. Based on new pics of one car upside down on freeway and angled car on top of it.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## saxman

Just-Thinking-51 said:


> Rail cars on the ground on both side of the track. The forces involved to make the train split and then have the lead cars land on the inside of the curve and the rest of the train side (fly) to the outside of the curve.
> 
> Would think the locomore picture is lead.


One picture I see has at least one of those cars landing upside-down. That doesn't look very survivable.


----------



## Bierboy




----------



## Just-Thinking-51

Yes it going to be a bad one. Anyone know the forces required to break apart a Talgo trainset?


----------



## printman2000

If 181 was trailing, then that means the train was in push mode, correct?

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## frequentflyer

The first pic............We hope for the best.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/12/18/us/amtrak-derails-washington-latest/index.html

There was a local newscaster who was just on that train reporting on the new service and is shaken up as he got to know the pax and enjoyed the trip.

Someone on twitter stated they hit a truck, do not think that is true, is there a crossing in the area?


----------



## Blackwolf

With this being the inaugural run on the new route, I'm reading reports that there were a lot of elected officials and transit managers who were on board.


----------



## jis

Some injuries but no fatalities among Interstate vehicles being reported now too.

There are now fatalities being reported on the train.

There were 83 people on board (78 passengers 5 crew). Full capacity is 250 or so.


----------



## Ngotwalt

I have heard people say there was a charger leading, and that its somewhere on the other side of the bridge.

Nick


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17

Based on the road closures and satellite views of the route, it appears the incident occurred at the southern end of the new routing just before it merges in with the old route (which likely will be the active route again until the wreck area is cleaned up and repaired).

Sent from my SM-J327P using Amtrak Forum mobile app


----------



## frequentflyer

Can someone post a google map of the location? Someone stated the train was doing 81mph but the trestle is in a sharp S curve.


----------



## niemi24s

As near as I can tell, this is the scene of the accident:


----------



## frequentflyer

Seattle Times state 3 people dead.


----------



## frequentflyer

niemi24s said:


> As near as I can tell, this is the scene of the accident:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Scene.jpg


Oh crap...........79 mph at that curve?


----------



## crescent-zephyr

frequentflyer said:


> niemi24s said:
> 
> 
> 
> As near as I can tell, this is the scene of the accident:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Scene.jpg
> 
> 
> 
> Oh crap...........79 mph at that curve?
Click to expand...

Which may have been allowed with Talgo equipment? That's what's going to be really tricky about this one, this was the first train through this area, was Talgo equipment incorrectly given a speed too high for this curve? The point of Talgo equipment is it can go faster around curves.

I'm not an expert at all, just thinking of the timing of this, will be a very interesting investigation.


----------



## frequentflyer

Per Fox news, the fatalities are form the cars that went into the woods. Because of low count of 70 pax, it possible, hopeful no one was in the Talgo that was upside down on the freeway.


----------



## printman2000

Paste this in to Google maps...

(47.0818761,-122.6745646)

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## niemi24s

frequentflyer said:


> Oh crap...........79 mph at that curve?


You don't _really_ believe every bit of hearsay you see here, do you?


----------



## Milw6166

The bridge is over the northbound lanes of I-5. (see the grafiti in photos) . The curve to the north of the southbound I-5 bridge is around 10 degrees which would definitely be slow speed and the junction with BNSF mainline is just ahead also a slower speed connection. So many factors to consider. I will just pray for all involved.


----------



## norfolkwesternhenry

If the pax count is so low, could it be possible for the conductor to put everyone into two or three cars to keep track of everyone?

Sent from my SM-G930P using Amtrak Forum mobile app


----------



## Just-Thinking-51

Yes sharp curve, if the GE is on tail. The over speed throws the train to the outside of the curve. Breaks apart and then two cars get knock to the inside of the curve and on to the highway below. Rear locomore is still pushing (by force of weight, and or the delay in Emergency brakes). The last few cars end up going down on inside of the curve on to the highway.

Ouch going to need a few more Ambulances.

With a report of VIP again, hope nobody was in the cab, distracted the engineer.

Got bring up the PTC issue. One think there a speed restrictions on this curve. PTC not yet working on this section?


----------



## daybeers

Does anyone know if they did do test runs on the new route? News outlets are saying they didn't and this first revenue service was actually the inaugural run, which I find hard to believe.


----------



## cirdan

crescent-zephyr said:


> frequentflyer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> niemi24s said:
> 
> 
> 
> As near as I can tell, this is the scene of the accident:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Scene.jpg
> 
> 
> 
> Oh crap...........79 mph at that curve?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Which may have been allowed with Talgo equipment? That's what's going to be really tricky about this one, this was the first train through this area, was Talgo equipment incorrectly given a speed too high for this curve? The point of Talgo equipment is it can go faster around curves.
> 
> I'm not an expert at all, just thinking of the timing of this, will be a very interesting investigation.
Click to expand...

Surely they would have tested the equipment on the new line before inauguration?


----------



## Bierboy

Seattle Times reported at least three fatalities...

Amtrak just now reported 78 passengers and five crew onboard...


----------



## printman2000

Is the angled car a really short car? Or is it broken in two?

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## jebr

KING 5 just stated (one of their guests, anyways) that there was extensive testing.

First revenue service wouldn't count test trains, anyways. It's true that this is the first revenue train, but there's been many test trains before they put it into revenue service.


----------



## daybeers

jebr said:


> KING 5 just stated (one of their guests, anyways) that there was extensive testing.
> 
> First revenue service wouldn't count test trains, anyways. It's true that this is the first revenue train, but there's been many test trains before they put it into revenue service.


That's what I thought.


----------



## LookingGlassTie




----------



## TrackWalker

daybeers said:


> Does anyone know if they did do test runs on the new route? News outlets are saying they didn't and this first revenue service was actually the inaugural run, which I find hard to believe.


https://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Projects/Rail/PNWRC_PtDefiance/TrackTesting.htm

*Testing and Certification* – The second phase of testing begins in February 2017. Amtrak trains will test the tracks and signals at speeds up to 79 mph between sunrise and sunset on weekends and during non-commuter hours on weekdays. Intersections being tested include Clover Creek Drive, North Thorne Lane, Berkeley Street, 41st Division Drive, and Barksdale Avenue (Steilacoom-DuPont Road), as well as all intersections currently on the Sounder line between the Tacoma Dome and Lakewood stations. These intersections will not be closed to traffic, but there may be delays to allow the trains to pass at varying speeds.


----------



## frequentflyer

niemi24s said:


> frequentflyer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh crap...........79 mph at that curve?
> 
> 
> 
> You don't _really_ believe every bit of hearsay you see here, do you?
Click to expand...

No, of course not. But it would not be the first time we had an "oops" in the speed department on a sharp curve involve passenger trains.


----------



## Ngotwalt

They have been doing testing for close to a year. Still haven't heard if PTC was in place and in service. Train was a Talgo Serie 6 USA transit, which has short cars like those seen, the cars did not break in half (as far as the photos I have seen anyway).

Nick


----------



## Bierboy

I have to quibble a bit with the news media calling this a "high speed Amtrak train"...technically I suppose that's correct. However, I've never heard LD routes called "high speed", and they routinely hit 79 mph. Japan would laugh at that terminology...


----------



## TylerP42

Police officer (state patrol) being interviewed by media saying she is having a hard time contacting PIO's at Amtrak.

Media going back and forth saying fatalities and no fatalities.


----------



## cirdan

Ngotwalt said:


> They have been doing testing for close to a year. Still haven't heard if PTC was in place and in service. Train was a Talgo Serie 6 USA transit, which has short cars like those seen, the cars did not break in half (as far as the photos I have seen anyway).
> 
> Nick


It is notable how the cars did separate.

See here for the far higher-speed derailmant at Compostela in Spain.

Admittedly this is not the same type of equipment, but I guess the overall dynamics are comparable.

Despite what happened, many of the cars did manage to stay attached.

Arguably, a train's ability to resist jackknifing in this type of situation can be life saving.


----------



## Manny T

For what it's worth, I found this about the Talgo in India:

"Okay, how does this technology work?

"Wheels of conventional coaches are joined by an axle underneath. Talgo’s wheels are mounted in pairs but not joined by an axle — instead, they are fitted individually on the coach. As a result, on a curve, the outer wheel (which has to cover a longer distance than the inner wheel) and the inner wheel are free to rotate at speeds of their own, largely foreclosing the possibility of derailment even at higher speeds. Also, the design of the coach is such that it senses the curve and shifts its weight in a manner that manages the tilt." http://indianexpress.com/article/explained/talgo-super-fast-bullet-train-indian-railways-mumbai-delhi-questions-performance-3029920/


----------



## BmoreFlyer

frequentflyer said:


> niemi24s said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> frequentflyer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh crap...........79 mph at that curve?
> 
> 
> 
> You don't _really_ believe every bit of hearsay you see here, do you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, of course not. But it would not be the first time we had an "oops" in the speed department on a sharp curve involve passenger trains.
Click to expand...

The Amtrak train tracking site has it at 81 MPH just before the derailment. I do not know how much it would have slowed down by the incident site. There is no speed indicated at the brown dot (incident site?)


----------



## Ngotwalt

cirdan said:


> Ngotwalt said:
> 
> 
> 
> They have been doing testing for close to a year. Still haven't heard if PTC was in place and in service. Train was a Talgo Serie 6 USA transit, which has short cars like those seen, the cars did not break in half (as far as the photos I have seen anyway).
> 
> Nick
> 
> 
> 
> It is notable how the cars did separate.
> 
> See here for the far higher-speed derailmant at Compostela in Spain.
> 
> Admittedly this is not the same type of equipment, but I guess the overall dynamics are comparable.
> 
> Despite what happened, many of the cars did manage to stay attached.
> 
> Arguably, a train's ability to resist jackknifing in this type of situation can be life saving.
Click to expand...

Overspeed in a corner with a Talgo train, my first though was of Compostela. There are definitely similarities between the derailments, and I think the probability of an overspeed derailment is absolutely growing. Was there PTC? If so why did it fail to prevent this derailment? Also the original poster who I didn't quote asked if the cars were short, or long and broken in half. That is a no, the train set itself obviously broke apart, the cars themselves seems to have remained largely intact.

Nick


----------



## jis

The set that derailed appears to be Mt. Adams. It is almost certain that it is a scratch.

Consist:

WDTX 1402
AMTK7903
7554
7804
7503
7504
7424
7423
7422
7421
7420
7120
AMTK 181


----------



## the_traveler

Talgo cars are coupled together and share a single axle. They are not coupled as other Amtrak or freight cars are.

So it is very possible during a derailment that one car goes left while the next car goes right.


----------



## WoodyinNYC

Ngotwalt said:


> cirdan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ngotwalt said:
> 
> 
> 
> They have been doing testing for close to a year. Still haven't heard if PTC was in place and in service. Train was a Talgo Serie 6 USA transit, which has short cars like those seen, the cars did not break in half (as far as the photos I have seen anyway).
> 
> Nick
> 
> 
> 
> It is notable how the cars did separate.
> 
> See here for the far higher-speed derailmant at Compostela in Spain.
> 
> Admittedly this is not the same type of equipment, but I guess the overall dynamics are comparable.
> 
> Despite what happened, many of the cars did manage to stay attached.
> 
> Arguably, a train's ability to resist jackknifing in this type of situation can be life saving.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Overspeed in a corner with a Talgo train, my first though was of Compostela. There are definitely similarities between the derailments, and I think the probability of an overspeed derailment is absolutely growing. Was there PTC? If so why did it fail to prevent this derailment? Also the original poster who I didn't quote asked if the cars were short, or long and broken in half. That is a no, the train set itself obviously broke apart, the cars themselves seems to have remained largely intact.
> 
> Nick
Click to expand...

Based on no current information whatsoever, I am reminded that a train crash can be a terrorist-type event, as when the Sunset Ltd was derailed west of Phoenix some 20 years ago.

The fact that this was the inaugural run of the new service, with attendant press and VIPs, contributes to my concern about that possibility.

None of the possible explanations for this tragedy are good in any way.


----------



## TrackWalker

www.amtrak.com

Amtrak Cascades services impacted

9:30 a.m. PT

*Individuals with questions about their friends and family on this train should call (800) 523-9101.*


----------



## jis

I am wondering where is the rest of the train?

There appears to be a number of cars on the other side of the bridge. The entire consist is some 13 cars plus the cab and the engine at the south end. Is the whole rest of the train derailed on the other side of the track which is not visible in the views being shown on TV because of difficulty accessing the area?

Yep, the entire train derailed right there and piled up. The Charger at the head of the train is on the ground on the other side of the bridge across I-5S. Visible from the Chopper. The Charger looks pretty badly beaten up too.

While a full investigation will establish the real cause, this looks suspiciously like an overspeed derailment on a curve.

This incidentally is the second Cascades derailment within a very short period of time.


----------



## VentureForth

I cannot imagine both the equipment and the crew not having been completely qualified and certified on the new route. But going into an S-Curve at 81.1 mph is pretty high. I guess no PTC in these guys, eh?


----------



## cirdan

Manny T said:


> For what it's worth, I found this about the Talgo in India:
> 
> "Okay, how does this technology work?
> 
> "Wheels of conventional coaches are joined by an axle underneath. Talgo’s wheels are mounted in pairs but not joined by an axle — instead, they are fitted individually on the coach. As a result, on a curve, the outer wheel (which has to cover a longer distance than the inner wheel) and the inner wheel are free to rotate at speeds of their own, largely foreclosing the possibility of derailment even at higher speeds. Also, the design of the coach is such that it senses the curve and shifts its weight in a manner that manages the tilt." http://indianexpress.com/article/explained/talgo-super-fast-bullet-train-indian-railways-mumbai-delhi-questions-performance-3029920/


Actually, a fixed axle is pretty good at preventing derailments. There is a famous video of Richard Feynmann explaining how it always seeks the center and is thus inherently stable.

The attraction of individual wheels is that you can provide low-level passageways between low-floor cars, leading to an overall low center of gravity which is an important component of the concept of passive tilting generally and Talgo trains in particular. Having separate wheels means there can be a minimal variation in the gauge which is an inherent disadvantage. This is to some extent compensated by some smart patented systems that Talgo invented applying pendular pressure to the wheels to force them to simulate the sinusoidal motion of fixed axles. But its a workaround. Further advantages are that the decoupling suppresses the propagation of vibrations caused by bad track geometry, and that the dynamics in which one coach guides the next smoothens the transition into and out of curves which reduces the tendency of wheels to climb the outer rail in tight curves and thus means the risk of derailamnt is reduced in those situations, which can be used to increase speeds.


----------



## TrackWalker

https://twitter.com/AlexRozierK5

I cannot state for certain but this may be a 30MPH curve.


----------



## CraigDK

jis said:


> I am wondering where is the rest of the train?
> 
> There appears to be a number of cars on the other side of the bridge. The entire consist is some 13 cars plus the cab and the engine at the south end. Is the whole rest of the train derailed on the other side of the track which is not visible in the views being shown on TV because of difficulty ac


They are now showing aerial pictures... Most of the consist is on the other side.


----------



## PerRock

printman2000 said:


> Is the angled car a really short car? Or is it broken in two?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


Talgo cars are shorter than your "regular" Amtrak car. I'm not certain which "angled car" you are referring to, but none of them look broken in half. Talgos share a wheel-set between two cars, so the car-end you can see (on the up-side-down car) looks a lot different than a normal car end.

peter


----------



## Cho Cho Charlie

BmoreFlyer said:


> The Amtrak train tracking site has it at 81 MPH just before the derailment. I do not know how much it would have slowed down by the incident site. There is no speed indicated at the brown dot (incident site?)


Our local news is also reporting that the train was doing 81.1 mph and that the max speed allowed was 79.9 mph. Though, as a non-train-type engineer, I would have hoped that the 79.9 mph limit had a bit of tolerance, and 81.1 mph would be within it.


----------



## jis

77 injured are being brought to hospitals.

Current reports are 6 fatalities.


----------



## crescent-zephyr

TrackWalker said:


> https://twitter.com/AlexRozierK5
> 
> I cannot state for certain but this may be a 30MPH curve.


Yeah... that would explain it if that's the case.


----------



## junebug

Ugh, more fodder for the government to get rid of Amtrak instead of getting us the money to improve.


----------



## frequentflyer

Now 6 dead............ Now NBC is stating that something was on the track that may have caused derailment.


----------



## TrackWalker

CraigDK said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> 
> There appears to be a number of cars on the other side of the bridge. The entire consist is some 13 cars plus the cab and the engine at the south end. Is the whole rest of the train derailed on the other side of the track which is not visible in the views being shown on TV because of difficulty ac
> 
> 
> 
> jis said:
> 
> 
> 
> 77 injured are being brought to hospitals.
> 
> Current reports are 6 fatalities.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They are now showing aerial pictures... Most of the consist is on the other side.
Click to expand...


http://komonews.com/news/local/derailed-train-falls-off-bridge-onto-i-5-lanes-south-of-tacoma


----------



## keelhauled

junebug said:


> Ugh, more fodder for the government to get rid of Amtrak instead of getting us the money to improve.


This is the third major Amtrak wreck in as many years. If they cannot operate safely, at some point it will stop being simply fodder and they will have to have some kind of reckoning. If (and I stress if) it does turn out to be an over speed incident, you have to wonder if the company learned anything from 188.


----------



## seat38a

CNN is showing the Charger completely off the tracks and upright on the 5 freeway. Both a Charger and a Genesis on the consist.


----------



## crescent-zephyr

It should be noted that Talgo Trains are pretty light weight and can brake pretty quick... just because the train was doing 81 before the curve, doesn't necessarily mean the engineer didn't properly decelerate before reaching the curve.


----------



## Just-Thinking-51

Very compact impact zone.


----------



## cirdan

crescent-zephyr said:


> It should be noted that Talgo Trains are pretty light weight and can brake pretty quick... just because the train was doing 81 before the curve, doesn't necessarily mean the engineer didn't properly decelerate before reaching the curve.


On the other hand, this is a new line and although I can understand why there are 30mph sections on legacy lines, shouldn't an all new line be aligned to allow consistently high speeds, especially on greenfield sites.


----------



## frequentflyer

Just-Thinking-51 said:


> Very compact impact zone.


Which is not good, thats alot of energy that has to dissipated.


----------



## printman2000

PerRock said:


> printman2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is the angled car a really short car? Or is it broken in two?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum
> 
> 
> 
> Talgo cars are shorter than your "regular" Amtrak car. I'm not certain which "angled car" you are referring to, but none of them look broken in half. Talgos share a wheel-set between two cars, so the car-end you can see (on the up-side-down car) looks a lot different than a normal car end.
> 
> peter
Click to expand...

I understand Talgos. But there is one car, the main one they have been showing, that appears very short. The one dangling off the bridge.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## frequentflyer

crescent-zephyr said:


> It should be noted that Talgo Trains are pretty light weight and can brake pretty quick... just because the train was doing 81 before the curve, doesn't necessarily mean the engineer didn't properly decelerate before reaching the curve.


The upcoming investigation will be interesting to read in regards to the Talgo strength and crash worthiness.


----------



## frequentflyer

Talgos are short compared to VLs, Superliners and Amfleet.


----------



## jis

printman2000 said:


> PerRock said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> printman2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is the angled car a really short car? Or is it broken in two?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum
> 
> 
> 
> Talgo cars are shorter than your "regular" Amtrak car. I'm not certain which "angled car" you are referring to, but none of them look broken in half. Talgos share a wheel-set between two cars, so the car-end you can see (on the up-side-down car) looks a lot different than a normal car end.
> 
> peter
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I understand Talgos. But there is one car, the main one they have been showing, that appears very short. The one dangling off the bridge.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum
Click to expand...

What about it? It is a standard length Talgo car.


----------



## printman2000

this one seems especially short. Maybe it is normal.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## Milw6166

Milw6166 said:


> The bridge is over the northbound lanes of I-5. (see the grafiti in photos) . The curve to the north of the southbound I-5 bridge is around 10 degrees which would definitely be slow speed and the junction with BNSF mainline is just ahead also a slower speed connection. So many factors to consider. I will just pray for all involved.


My mistake. It is the southbound lanes of I-5.


----------



## Cho Cho Charlie

printman2000 said:


> this one seems especially short. Maybe it is normal.


Is that an entire car? Or only one piece of one that broke up?


----------



## TrackWalker

Cho Cho Charlie said:


> printman2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> this one seems especially short. Maybe it is normal.
> 
> 
> 
> Is that an entire car? Or only one piece of one that broke up?
Click to expand...

Optical illusion. It not only is going across the freeway, it is going under the bridge to a degree. Overhead views show it the same size as the others.


----------



## frequentflyer

Cho Cho Charlie said:


> printman2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> this one seems especially short. Maybe it is normal.
> 
> 
> 
> Is that an entire car? Or only one piece of one that broke up?
Click to expand...

Talgo cars are shorter than normal Amtrak Pax stock.


----------



## frequentflyer

http://web.talgoamerica.com/veryhighspeed-techspecmenu


----------



## Devil's Advocate

keelhauled said:


> junebug said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ugh, more fodder for the government to get rid of Amtrak instead of getting us the money to improve.
> 
> 
> 
> This is the third major Amtrak wreck in as many years. If they cannot operate safely, at some point it will stop being simply fodder and they will have to have some kind of reckoning. If (and I stress if) it does turn out to be an over speed incident, you have to wonder if the company learned anything from 188.
Click to expand...

Amtrak would have to experience a crash like this every few minutes just to catch up to automobile fatalities. At which point they'd soon run out of available power and active rolling stock. It's virtually impossible for passenger rail to become a bigger threat to life and limb than the primary alternative.


----------



## Bierboy

AP now also quoting a "U.S. official" that an obstruction is being considered as a possible cause...possibly a truck.


----------



## Cho Cho Charlie

A train type of truck, or a Mack type of truck?

Being on an overpass, I would think it wouldn't also be an at-grade crossing.


----------



## Bierboy

Cho Cho Charlie said:


> A train type of truck, or a Mack type of truck?
> 
> Being on an overpass, I would think it wouldn't also be an at-grade crossing.


Good question...there was a reference to a vehicle I believe, but, given where the wreckage ended up, it's hard to imagine, if it were a vehicle, that it happened at a grade crossing.


----------



## Bierboy

NTSB says "too early" to say if speed was the cause...*"National Transportation Safety Board said it's too early to know if the crash was due to high speed.*

*Bella Dinh-Zarr, spokesperson for NTSB, said a team of 20 investigators will be at the scene later this evening and will be able to further assess at this point."*


----------



## AmtrakBlue

There appears to be a service road by the bridge. A truck could easily have been on that road and fouled the tracks.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## jis

I wonder who this mystery US official is. Initially it was thought that it was someone from NTSB. But NTSB just said that they do not have that information. They are just putting together and getting an away team going. And yet AP has access to this anonymous US Official who's spilling a few beans. Very curious.


----------



## Ngotwalt

Let’s ask this question then, if the train were going track speed, 79MPH about to slow for a speed restriction, and it struck something, could that impact have somehow prevent the brakes from engaging? Usually when damage to the brake system occurs, pressure drops, brakes go on, train stops. The evidence seems to suggest an over speed derailment, how could an impact have damaged the equipment in such a way that the breaks failed to respond? I’m not by any means saying it’s impossible, but it is not scenario I have ever heard of...

Nick


----------



## Rover

Bierboy said:


> Cho Cho Charlie said:
> 
> 
> 
> A train type of truck, or a Mack type of truck?
> 
> Being on an overpass, I would think it wouldn't also be an at-grade crossing.
> 
> 
> 
> Good question...there was a reference to a vehicle I believe, but, given where the wreckage ended up, it's hard to imagine, if it were a vehicle, that it happened at a grade crossing.
Click to expand...

Looking at the Google Maps view, there does not appear to be a crossing before the track curves over Interstate 5.

There is a road nearby (that appears to dead end) that has something to do with the golf course property adjacent to the track ?

The reason there are not ground photos from the South side of the train bridge is that area is private property with no apparent roads to that area near the bridge. And no News trucks or crews are being allowed to cross under the bridge?


----------



## TrackWalker

jis said:


> I wonder who this mystery US official is. Initially it was thought that it was someone from NTSB. But NTSB just said that they do not have that information. They are just putting together and getting an away team going. And yet AP has access to this anonymous US Official who's spilling a few beans. Very curious.


I recall after the derailment first happened reading that some local government official on the train tweeted that he thought they may have hit a truck....


----------



## Bierboy

Here's the exact text from AP rebstruction --* "An official briefed on the investigation told The Associated Press that preliminary signs indicate that Train 501 may have struck something before going off the track. The official was not authorized to discuss the investigation publicly and spoke to on the condition of anonymity."*


----------



## keelhauled

Devil's Advocate said:


> keelhauled said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> junebug said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ugh, more fodder for the government to get rid of Amtrak instead of getting us the money to improve.
> 
> 
> 
> This is the third major Amtrak wreck in as many years. If they cannot operate safely, at some point it will stop being simply fodder and they will have to have some kind of reckoning. If (and I stress if) it does turn out to be an over speed incident, you have to wonder if the company learned anything from 188.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Amtrak would have to experience a crash like this every few minutes just to catch up to automobile fatalities. At which point they'd soon run out of available power and active rolling stock. It's virtually impossible for passenger rail to become a bigger threat to life and limb than the primary alternative.
Click to expand...

Yes, but on the other hand airliners would have to fall out of the sky monthly to match Amtrak's fatality rate these last few years.


----------



## s10mk

I used the measuring tool in Google maps, and there was a distance of 1/4 mile between the spot where the cascades was clocked doing 81mph and the bend. Would that have been enough time for the train to deccelerate to a safe speed for that particular curve?


----------



## KmH

I think the train would have to emergency brake to have any hope of slowing down from 80 to 30 in that distance.

Wouldn't it have to be a sizable truck to derail the train? In other words a pickup truck is not likely to derail a train.

I think over speed for the curve is still the most likely cause.

Time will add clarity to what actually happened.


----------



## jis

If there was a truck involved, one wonders where it landed up. There is a surprising lack of any damage to the track as far as is visible. Very strange.


----------



## Cho Cho Charlie

Trump is saying that it is due to an aging overpass crumpling apart?


----------



## norfolkwesternhenry

Cho Cho Charlie said:


> Trump is saying that it is due to an aging overpass crumpling apart?


Wasn't the cutoff just constructed, or is this part of the old line.
Sent from my SM-G930P using Amtrak Forum mobile app


----------



## JoeBas

Cho Cho Charlie said:


> Trump is saying that it is due to an aging overpass crumpling apart?


*sigh*


----------



## jis

Welll.... completely meets expectations


----------



## jis

norfolkwesternhenry said:


> Cho Cho Charlie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Trump is saying that it is due to an aging overpass crumpling apart?
> 
> 
> 
> Wasn't the cutoff just constructed, or is this part of the old line.
> Sent from my SM-G930P using Amtrak Forum mobile app
Click to expand...

It is part of an old line that was upgraded.


----------



## norfolkwesternhenry

jis said:


> norfolkwesternhenry said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cho Cho Charlie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Trump is saying that it is due to an aging overpass crumpling apart?
> 
> 
> 
> Wasn't the cutoff just constructed, or is this part of the old line.
> Sent from my SM-G930P using Amtrak Forum mobile app
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It is part of an old line that was upgraded.
Click to expand...

Ah thank you, was it modified in anyway, such as superelevating?
Sent from my SM-G930P using Amtrak Forum mobile app


----------



## Mark P

Overhead photos:

https://imgur.com/a/mCttO

https://i.imgur.com/pHGyhbj.jpg


----------



## jis

norfolkwesternhenry said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> norfolkwesternhenry said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cho Cho Charlie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Trump is saying that it is due to an aging overpass crumpling apart?
> 
> 
> 
> Wasn't the cutoff just constructed, or is this part of the old line.
> Sent from my SM-G930P using Amtrak Forum mobile app
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It is part of an old line that was upgraded.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ah thank you, was it modified in anyway, such as superelevating?
> Sent from my SM-G930P using Amtrak Forum mobile app
Click to expand...

The track was essentially re-laid for higher speed. that would probably involve adjusting both superelevation and curve spirals.


----------



## Bob Dylan

CNN just had a Retired NTSB ""Expert" say that the PTC was NOT Activated!???


----------



## jis

Why would anyone assume that PTC was active in that area beats me. A safe default assumption at present is that PTC is not active, unless one has specific information that it is.


----------



## Bierboy

Some close-up photos of damage -- https://twitter.com/PierceSheriff/status/942804212701806594/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bbc.com%2Fnews%2Fworld-us-canada-42401707


----------



## Bierboy

Washington State DOT statement --


----------



## PRR 60

Discussion and speculation as to what happened out there is permitted.


----------



## PRR 60

jis said:


> Why would anyone assume that PCT was active in that area beats me. A safe default assumption at present is that PTC is not active, unless one has specific information that it is.


Amtrak CEO reportedly confirmed that PTC was not active. It was slated to go live next year.


----------



## jis

PRR 60 said:


> Discussion and speculation as to what happened out there is permitted.


Thank you!


----------



## Agent

Something I haven't noticed before: Google has added the location of the derailment to Google Maps.


----------



## KmH

jis said:


> PRR 60 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Discussion and speculation as to what happened out there is permitted.
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you!
Click to expand...

Having now seen where the various parts of the train came to rest and the Google Maps overhead of the tracks, it's pretty obvious to me after doing some basic math, that the train was going to fast to make the curve.

Emergency Stop may have been initiated, but way to late.

Why the train was going to fast is what we won't know for some time.


----------



## KmH

Like a Jacobs Bogie?


----------



## Lonestar648

It was reported that the train was traveling 81.1 MPH by Amtrak tracking close to where the accident occurred with a speed limit of 79. Not sure how accurate the tracking info is.


----------



## George K

Lonestar648 said:


> It was reported that the train was traveling 81.1 MPH by Amtrak tracking close to where the accident occurred with a speed limit of 79. Not sure how accurate the tracking info is.


So the obvious question is....


----------



## Green Maned Lion

KmH said:


> Like a Jacobs Bogie?


Yes and no. The wheel set spans two cars, but it is a single axial pair, not a tandem, and the interior of the carbody finds itself between the wheels, which is the main point of the design, or at least one of them. Also, the way they are set up, the car pendularly moves against the turn, like a running person.


----------



## jis

From Amtrak news conference ...

The trailing P42 was not under power. The train was entirely powered by the SC-44 at the head end.

The track owned by Sound Transit dispatched by BNSF.



KmH said:


> Like a Jacobs Bogie?


Not quite. This is a very different design from the Jacobs bogies as seen on TGVs.

There are a few other possibly coincidental similarities with the derailment of 188 on the NEC. The most striking to me is that both trains were being powered by a new more capable locomotive that the operators are newly getting used to. I have no idea whether this is a factor in any way.


----------



## caravanman

Sad news indeed. I heard that local folk were not happy about Amtrak using this new route? If the train did hit something...?

I guess simple overspeeding, possibly due to driver distraction by other folk in the cab. Just a guess on my part.

Ed.


----------



## jackal

KmH said:


> I think the train would have to emergency brake to have any hope of slowing down from 80 to 30 in that distance.
> 
> Wouldn't it have to be a sizable truck to derail the train? In other words a pickup truck is not likely to derail a train.
> 
> I think over speed for the curve is still the most likely cause.
> 
> Time will add clarity to what actually happened.


On an inaugural run with VIPs aboard, how likely is it the engineer was alone in the cab? Granted, they'd been running tests for weeks, but still, it seems that early on in its use and with VIPs aboard, chances were there were two or three people (at least two of whom were qualified on the territory) in the locomotive cab...which seems to me to make an overspeed error unlikely.

How sure are we the curve is a 30mph curve? It seems to just be speculation based on something said on Twitter.

Edit: here's the link to the specific tweet in question. I had clicked the link in post #56 before but it was just to the account, not to the specific tweet, so I didn't see the actual tweet. It clearly does show T-30/P-30: https://twitter.com/AlexRozierK5/status/942821880775327744


----------



## Green Maned Lion

Just because a curve is an F30 does not mean its a P30, let alone a T30.


----------



## jebr

I recall seeing on one of the local news live streams the sign for the curve showing it was a P-30. There was one other speed limit as well, not sure if it was T-30 or F-30.


----------



## bretton88

Green Maned Lion said:


> Just because a curve is an F30 does not mean its a P30, let alone a T30.


The curve is T-30 and P-30. No F listed at all.


----------



## Green Maned Lion

Well, if it really was going 81.1 in a T-30, than that would be an overspeed. But we also don't know for sure that Amtrak's sensors are completely accurate.

I find it exceedingly hard to believe that the engineer on this inaugural run of a route would be able to be that distracted.


----------



## JoeBas

Green Maned Lion said:


> I find it exceedingly hard to believe that the engineer on this inaugural run of a route would be able to be that distracted.


IMO, depends on if there were interlopers in the cab, and how distracting they were being.


----------



## keelhauled

Several years ago a Via train derailed with three people in the cab. No one caught the misaligned switch I think it was. Although I don't think anyone has said whether there were multiple people in the cab in 501.


----------



## Lonestar648

I have reviewing the photos, finding that it is odd that the track is totally in place instead fully torn up. Also, looking at the destroyed signal tower the engine must have left the track before the curve. Of course we have have to wait for the NTSB, but a couple things I notice from the photos now being posted.


----------



## niemi24s

Judging from this image... https://imgur.com/pHGyhbj ... the second linked image in Post #102, it appears to me that the lead locomotive was completely off the tracks some distance before the beginning of the curve. 

Edit: Appearances can be deceiving, so disregard the above and refer to Post #`197


----------



## frequentflyer




----------



## frequentflyer

I take it the Charger will be rerailed and sent to Sacromento for a complete rebuild?


----------



## Green Maned Lion

Yeah. It also impacted something head on, and I don't see anything apparent in its path that could have been the cause.


----------



## Green Maned Lion

More likely, it will just be scrapped.


----------



## Bierboy

niemi24s said:


> Judging from this image... https://imgur.com/pHGyhbj ... the second linked image in Post #102, it appears to me that the lead locomotive was completely off the tracks some distance before the beginning of the curve.


Broken link...


----------



## Bierboy

This article seems to indicate there is a challenge for the engineer to decelerate from 79 mph to 30 mph in that area...along with some previous complaints from the engineers

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/train-derails-from-bridge-onto-interstate-5-near-olympia/


----------



## Lonestar648

Not knowing the scale of the photos, I would guess about 1000 feet before the curve,


----------



## Green Maned Lion

I wouldn't place too much stock in that particular article.


----------



## Just-Thinking-51

NPR radio has audio from the dispatcher.

Two people in cab.

Not for everyone to listen to. Drama is a understatement.

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/12/18/571654675/amtrak-train-derails-on-overpass-in-washington-causing-multiple-fatalities


----------



## Devil's Advocate

frequentflyer said:


> I take it the Charger will be rerailed and sent to Sacromento for a complete rebuild?


I'd expect to see it moved out of the way and then stored in its current state for several months if not years.


----------



## frequentflyer

Green Maned Lion said:


> More likely, it will just be scrapped.


Couldn't they just put on a new body? The Frame could be toast I guess. Who is doing maintenance for Northwest Chargers?


----------



## The Chief

Amtrak official at onsite press conference DuPont on FOX FNC Neil Cavuto hour identified herself as Gay Banks Olson, Asst Supt Operations.

Then when talking of consist referred to Charger loco, and a "P-52" loco.

Guess she was confused.


----------



## s10mk

Lonestar648 said:


> I have reviewing the photos, finding that it is odd that the track is totally in place instead fully torn up. Also, looking at the destroyed signal tower the engine must have left the track before the curve. Of course we have have to wait for the NTSB, but a couple things I notice from the photos now being posted.


Where was there a signal tower.


----------



## Lonestar648

I saw what I believed used to be one on the right.


----------



## KmH

The front of the locomotive leveled several pretty stout trees before it came to rest and it looks to me that it came off the tracks at the start of the curve.

There is no foreign (truck) debris is the photo in post #141

Since the train was apparently clocked at 81.1 mph just before the curve I wonder if the tracks have a slight downgrade approaching the curve.


----------



## Cho Cho Charlie

Are, what appears to be, orange spray paint markings, like "A" and "B1", part of the recue operations? Or of some preliminary accident reconstruction?


----------



## caravanman

Gosh... nothing is going to get around that curve in post 141 at 80mph... :-(


----------



## Rover

Is there a link to listen to the Amtrak Media conference call (not the NTSB one)?

Has it been officially confirmed that the engineer survived the derailment?


----------



## Bierboy

KmH said:


> The front of the locomotive leveled several pretty stout trees before it came to rest and it looks to me that it came off the tracks at the start of the curve.
> 
> There is no foreign (truck) debris is the photo in post #141
> 
> Since the train was apparently clocked at 81.1 mph just before the curve I wonder if the tracks have a slight downgrade approaching the curve.


The article from the Seattle Times that I posted did say there is a downgrade...

"...In this stretch of track, a train engineer faces the challenge of decelerating in a short space, when approaching the curve and bypass, said John Hiatt, a longtime private investigator in train safety disputes. A downward grade coming into that curve, you’ve got that working against you. You’ve got to make a pretty good estimate of how to get that down from 81 to 30,” Hiatt said of the track, located near Mounts Road outside of DuPont. “From what I’ve heard, there were several complaints by engineers about this.”


----------



## tomfuller

Rover said:


> Is there a link to listen to the Amtrak Media conference call (not the NTSB one)?
> 
> Has it been officially confirmed that the engineer survived the derailment?


The lead engine hit a big tree about 10 to 15 feet off the ground and broke off a fork of the tree. From the radio traffic, the engineer had his eyes swollen shut andwas bleeding from his head.

The names of all passengers onboard should be on the conductors unit. to be compared with hospital and ambulance records. I hope they are not waiting for the NTSB to

recover bodies from train cars.


----------



## Green Maned Lion

77 people taken to hospitals, 6 fatalities. That's 85 people.

The nature of distance perspective distortion sharpens that curve in ones eye. I checked that radius on a map; I could go around such a curve on asphalt in my van, a Mercedes Metris (aka Vito), at 80 mph. In fact, I do so regularly.

I am not saying that a train can, but that curve is not quite sharp enough for the almost tangential and level path the locomotive took to it.


----------



## Karl1459

Green Maned Lion said:


> 77 people taken to hospitals, 6 fatalities. That's 85 people.
> 
> The nature of distance perspective distortion sharpens that curve in ones eye. I checked that radius on a map; I could go around such a curve on asphalt in my van, a Mercedes Metris (aka Vito).
> 
> I am not saying that a train can, but that curve is not quite sharp enough for the almost tangential and level path the locomotive took to it.


There were several people injured in motor vehicles who happened to be on I-5.


----------



## Just-Thinking-51

Cho Cho Charlie said:


> Are, what appears to be, orange spray paint markings, like "A" and "B1", part of the recue operations? Or of some preliminary accident reconstruction?


Yes part of the rescue operations. Command and Control. (We need a resource to car C).

Each car would have a team assigned. If the officer needs additional resources (s)he call the command with what is need and where its need. Also useful to Clear the car so additional resources are going to where there needed.

During Hurricane the search teams mark doors of the house to indicate they have check the buildings.


----------



## WoodyinNYC

Green Maned Lion said:


> 77 people taken to hospitals, 6 fatalities. That's 85 people.


Not to quibble ... except that's part of what we do here ... but you've left somebody unaccounted for.


----------



## Just-Thinking-51

A early photo show several tents set up. Each color is a triage level. The colors show transportation order and severe of injuries. Red is 1st or Immediate, Yellow is 2nd or Delayed, Green is 3rd or Minor, Black is last to transport or Deceased/Expected.


----------



## KmH

Lonestar648 said:


> I saw what I believed used to be one on the right.


Who took that photo?


----------



## Lonestar648

It came from the "TRAINS" web site article on the crash.


----------



## Green Maned Lion

WoodyinNYC said:


> Green Maned Lion said:
> 
> 
> 
> 77 people taken to hospitals, 6 fatalities. That's 85 people.
> 
> 
> 
> Not to quibble ... except that's part of what we do here ... but you've left somebody unaccounted for.
Click to expand...

I didn't account for anyone, I just did some basic math.


----------



## WoodyinNYC

Green Maned Lion said:


> WoodyinNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Green Maned Lion said:
> 
> 
> 
> 77 people taken to hospitals, 6 fatalities. That's 85 people.
> 
> 
> 
> Not to quibble ... except that's part of what we do here ... but you've left somebody unaccounted for.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I didn't account for anyone, I just did some basic math.
Click to expand...

And your basic math is 77 + 6 = 85?

I keep getting a different sum.


----------



## Green Maned Lion

As well you should be.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Green Maned Lion said:


> WoodyinNYC said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Green Maned Lion said:
> 
> 
> 
> 77 people taken to hospitals, 6 fatalities. That's 85 people.
> 
> 
> 
> Not to quibble ... except that's part of what we do here ... but you've left somebody unaccounted for.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I didn't account for anyone, I just did some basic math.
Click to expand...

Which is off by 2, not one, so Woody is also missing somebody.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

This report says there were only 3 fatalities. http://komonews.com/news/local/derailed-train-falls-off-bridge-onto-i-5-lanes-south-of-tacoma


----------



## Medic981

Cho Cho Charlie said:


> Are, what appears to be, orange spray paint markings, like "A" and "B1", part of the recue operations? Or of some preliminary accident reconstruction?


When fire rescue is searching and clearing structures or vehicles in mass casualty situations, they are marked as to not duplicate effort.


----------



## dlagrua

Tragic event. Hope that all those hurt recover soon. I just wonder if the theory that something on the tracks caused the derailment is valid


----------



## Rover

dlagrua said:


> Tragic event. Hope that all those hurt recover soon. I just wonder if the theory that something on the tracks caused the derailment is valid


I wish that all Amtrak engines came with a forward facing digital camera, that recorded on a loop, the last 5 minutes of travel, or something like that. That way there'd be video of most collisions.


----------



## Lonestar648

The media seems to be ignoring that report and focising on the the speed limit change from 79 to 30 in 1/4 mile.


----------



## CCC1007

Rover said:


> dlagrua said:
> 
> 
> 
> Tragic event. Hope that all those hurt recover soon. I just wonder if the theory that something on the tracks caused the derailment is valid
> 
> 
> 
> I wish that all Amtrak engines came with a forward facing digital camera, that recorded on a loop, the last 5 minutes of travel, or something like that. That way there'd be video of most collisions.
Click to expand...

they do... it probably hasn’t been pulled yet, and we likely won’t see it until all legal battles from this incident are done and the evidence is made public.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## NE933

I'm thinking the size of these Talgo cars make them poor energy dissipators, and, that the small length enabled that one upside down car on the road, coming squarely to rest in the worst place: a zone where the remaining cars would come down on top of it.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

http://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2017/12/18/washington-amtrak-derailment-aerials-wolf.cnn/video/playlists/washington-passenger-train-derailment/


----------



## s10mk

Lonestar648 said:


> I saw what I believed used to be one on the right.


Purely speculation, but from this picture and from looking at where the charger came to a stop. It sure looks like the charger came off of the tracks before it reached the bend


----------



## A Voice

Lonestar648 said:


> The media seems to be ignoring that report and focising on the the speed limit change from 79 to 30 in 1/4 mile.


The media is a remarkably poor source of reliable information anymore. Not saying there was or was not an object struck (clearly, there was once off the ROW), but when you have a commentator (CNN) referring to the rear P-42 (which appears to have held the rails) as the "front" of the train, you have reason to be suspect of everything else they report.


----------



## edjbox

Are the other Amtrak trains being diverted back to the original trackage around port defiance?


----------



## KmH

A Voice said:


> The media is a remarkably poor source of reliable information anymore. Not saying there was or was not an object struck (clearly, there was once off the ROW), but when you have a commentator (CNN) referring to the rear P-42 (which appears to have held the rails) as the "front" of the train, you have reason to be suspect of everything else they report.


QFT. 


> The media is a remarkably poor source of reliable information anymore.


----------



## Green Maned Lion

Drop the anymore. It never has been.


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

printman2000 said:


> Is the locomotive they are showing 181 the lead or trailing unit?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


Trailing. The leader was WSDOT SC-44 #1402, which sustained severe damage.


----------



## Big Green Chauvanist

Besides multiple media outlets calling the Cascade a "high-speed train", one of the nightly national news programs this evening referred to it as a "commuter train".


----------



## Rover

Big Green Chauvanist said:


> Besides multiple media outlets calling the Cascade a "high-speed train", one of the nightly national news programs this evening referred to it as a "commuter train".


----------



## jackal

edjbox said:


> Are the other Amtrak trains being diverted back to the original trackage around port defiance?


https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/amtrak-guest-rewards/1882781-pnw-routes-losing-scenic-stretch-after-dec-17th.htmlsays yes.



Big Green Chauvanist said:


> Besides multiple media outlets calling the Cascade a "high-speed train", one of the nightly national news programs this evening referred to it as a "commuter train".


I have a friend who works in production on CBS Evening News. I told him to tell the powers that be to quit referring to it as a "high-speed train." We'll see if it has any effect...


----------



## Heath Loxton

The point defiance bypass is a silly piece of trackage. it is not scenic, not safe, the local residents did not want it and it only saves 10 minutes or something.


----------



## junebug

Cho Cho Charlie said:


> Trump is saying that it is due to an aging overpass crumpling apart?


Whatever happened to "fixing the aging infrastructure" of this country?


----------



## Jbpdx

Trains had made multiple test runs with no problems. Media is quick to blame speed but test runs probably operated at the same speed. Talgo trains are designed to operate at high speed on curves. They run at 150mph in Spain. What makes this suspicious is that it occurred on the inaugural run and not on a test. The city of Lakewood has been whipping up opposition to the bypass for years. They even tried a ballot initiative against it. Wouldn’t surprise me if a disgruntled opponent was involved. If something substantial was on the track, this was most likely sabotage.


----------



## JoeBas

Heath Loxton said:


> The point defiance bypass is a silly piece of trackage. it is not scenic, not safe, the local residents did not want it and it only saves 10 minutes or something.


It doesn't need to be scenic. It's perfectly safe if operated properly, and not sabotaged. And quite frankly, if we only listen to what local residents want, nothing would ever happen in this country ever ever ever ever ever ever again.

But otherwise, spot-on.


----------



## Rover

Jbpdx said:


> Trains had made multiple test runs with no problems. Media is quick to blame speed *but test runs probably operated at the same speed*. Talgo trains are designed to operate at high speed on curves. They run at 150mph in Spain. What makes this suspicious is that it occurred on the inaugural run and not on a test. The city of Lakewood has been whipping up opposition to the bypass for years. They even tried a ballot initiative against it. Wouldn’t surprise me if a disgruntled opponent was involved. If something substantial was on the track, this was most likely sabotage.


I pray that if it was sabotage, that whomever was at fault will be charged, tried, and sentenced.

Any guess to about how long will it be before the engineer's statement is made public??


----------



## djexel

I’d love to see the cab-camera footage.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## Woodcut60

Jbpdx said:


> Trains had made multiple test runs with no problems. Media is quick to blame speed but test runs probably operated at the same speed. Talgo trains are designed to operate at high speed on curves. They run at 150mph in Spain. What makes this suspicious is that it occurred on the inaugural run and not on a test. The city of Lakewood has been whipping up opposition to the bypass for years. They even tried a ballot initiative against it. Wouldn’t surprise me if a disgruntled opponent was involved. If something substantial was on the track, this was most likely sabotage.


Sabotage would be just horrible, if that's the case. I understand that this was a completely new track and the Spanish Talgo equipment should have no difficulties to operate at higher speeds.


----------



## Seaboard92

Let's take a moment to reflect on the memory of our two friends from the rail advocacy community that we lost in the accident. RIP Jim And Zach. Let's not forget them in this tragedy.


----------



## neroden

I am very sad about this.

And I do suspect sabotage. There will be an NTSB investigation, but this is extremely suspicious.


----------



## cirdan

Ngotwalt said:


> Let’s ask this question then, if the train were going track speed, 79MPH about to slow for a speed restriction, and it struck something, could that impact have somehow prevent the brakes from engaging? Usually when damage to the brake system occurs, pressure drops, brakes go on, train stops. The evidence seems to suggest an over speed derailment, how could an impact have damaged the equipment in such a way that the breaks failed to respond? I’m not by any means saying it’s impossible, but it is not scenario I have ever heard of...
> 
> Nick


There are indeed rare instances of accidents having been caused by brake failures. For example the GG1 that plowed into Washinton DC in 1953.

But brakes are designed to be fail safe, so if anything goes wrong they come on rather than stay off.

But under very special sets of circumstances, it is indeed possible, yes.

Maybe the front locomotive did brake correctly but somewhere along the train a brake pipe was blocked and the unbraked heavy rear locomotive pushed the train out in the curve.

But this is unlikely.


----------



## cirdan

Big Green Chauvanist said:


> Besides multiple media outlets calling the Cascade a "high-speed train", one of the nightly national news programs this evening referred to it as a "commuter train".


At least it hasn't been referred to as a caboose yet.


----------



## neroden

If it is simply overspeed, it raises the question of why PTC wasn't operating, on what is a practically rebuilt line. The European/Chinese versions of PTC have been practically universal for years now.


----------



## Rover

neroden said:


> If it is simply overspeed, it raises the question of why PTC wasn't operating, on what is a practically rebuilt line. The European/Chinese versions of PTC have been practically universal for years now.


One of the news reports I watched mentioned that the PTC was in the "testing phase" for that route, and wasn't used because of that.

_It was not clear how fast the train was moving at the precise moment when it derailed._

_Kimberley Reason with Sound Transit, the Seattle-area transit agency that owns the tracks, confirmed to the AP that the speed limit at the point where the train derailed is 30 mph. Speed signs are posted two miles before the speed zone and just before the speed zone approaching the curve, she said._

So, were both speed zone signs there at 7:30am, when the derailment occurred, in the pre-dawn morning of the 18th ?? (Sunrise was at 7:52)

At this point, I want to remark, that after the $180 Million used to upgrade the new route, I would think they could afford to take off the graffiti from that bridge (where the derailment occurred) before starting the inauguration run.


----------



## Bierboy

NTSB - “501 was doing 80 in a 30 zone when it derailed...no PTC.”

AP - “Bella Dinh-Zarr, a National Transportation Safety Board member, said at a Monday night news conference that information from the event data recorder in the rear locomotive showed the train was traveling at 80 mph in a 30 mph zone when it derailed at 7:34 a.m.”

Sent from my iPad using Amtrak Forum


----------



## Green Maned Lion

But a good question is, why?


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Seaboard92 said:


> Let's take a moment to reflect on the memory of our two friends from the rail advocacy community that we lost in the accident. RIP Jim And Zach. Let's not forget them in this tragedy.


----------



## Green Maned Lion

Jim and Zach?


----------



## Ryan

I haven’t seen confirmation in the press anywhere yet, but two of the fatalities appear to be well known members of All Aboard Washington.


----------



## jis

On this matter of the All Board Washington folks, Charlie is the most reliable source, and he has posted about this sad news on Facebook. RIP Jim and Zach.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## Bob Dylan

jis said:


> On this matter of the All Board Washington folks, Charlie is the most reliable source, and he has posted about this sad news on Facebook. RIP Jim and Zach.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


Ditto.


----------



## Jbpdx

Access road where something could have been dumped on the track.


----------



## niemi24s

The line below is tangent to the track and ends up at about the position of the lead locomotive:




Imagery date per Google Earth is 5/22/17 and appears to be more recent than the one in Post # 196.


----------



## Hotblack Desiato

Jbpdx said:


> Trains had made multiple test runs with no problems. Media is quick to blame speed but test runs probably operated at the same speed. Talgo trains are designed to operate at high speed on curves. They run at 150mph in Spain. What makes this suspicious is that it occurred on the inaugural run and not on a test. The city of Lakewood has been whipping up opposition to the bypass for years. They even tried a ballot initiative against it. Wouldn’t surprise me if a disgruntled opponent was involved. If something substantial was on the track, this was most likely sabotage.


The preliminary reports indicate it was going 79+ mph through a 30 mph area. The wreckage (based oh the photos) does not appear to be the kind of wreckage that occurs during a derailment at 30 mph.

Also, while Talgo trains can operate at higher speeds around curves, the difference, from my understanding, is really one for passenger comfort only. The tilting technology allows for the forces inside the cars to be slightly more perpendicular to the floor and less lateral. The equipment itself isn't really any more physically capable of higher speeds than standard equipment (after all, Talgo trains operate with standard locomotives and 40-year-old demotored cab cars at those higher speeds). Also, the speed differential for Talgos vs. standard equipment is generally only around 10-15% or so (from my recollection, the typical curves where Talgos are allowed higher speeds are generally posted for P60/T67; there may be a few other variations, but I can't remember and it's been a few years since I had any reason to know this information).

Almost nobody is going to make it around a 30 mph curve going 80 mph, regardless of the type of equipment used.


----------



## Cho Cho Charlie

Green Maned Lion said:


> Well, if it really was going 81.1 in a T-30, than that would be an overspeed. But we also don't know for sure that Amtrak's sensors are completely accurate.
> 
> I find it exceedingly hard to believe that the engineer on this inaugural run of a route would be able to be that distracted.


The inaugural run was suppose to highlight just how much time the $180.7 million project shaved off the old/previous travel time. I have to wonder if the engineer was under pressure to do the run as fast as possible, so that the supporters could brag (show off) that the project was indeed worth it.


----------



## seat38a

Hotblack Desiato said:


> Jbpdx said:
> 
> 
> 
> Trains had made multiple test runs with no problems. Media is quick to blame speed but test runs probably operated at the same speed. Talgo trains are designed to operate at high speed on curves. They run at 150mph in Spain. What makes this suspicious is that it occurred on the inaugural run and not on a test. The city of Lakewood has been whipping up opposition to the bypass for years. They even tried a ballot initiative against it. Wouldn’t surprise me if a disgruntled opponent was involved. If something substantial was on the track, this was most likely sabotage.
> 
> 
> 
> The preliminary reports indicate it was going 79+ mph through a 30 mph area. The wreckage (based oh the photos) does not appear to be the kind of wreckage that occurs during a derailment at 30 mph.
> 
> Also, while Talgo trains can operate at higher speeds around curves, the difference, from my understanding, is really one for passenger comfort only. The tilting technology allows for the forces inside the cars to be slightly more perpendicular to the floor and less lateral. The equipment itself isn't really any more physically capable of higher speeds than standard equipment (after all, Talgo trains operate with standard locomotives and 40-year-old demotored cab cars at those higher speeds). Also, the speed differential for Talgos vs. standard equipment is generally only around 10-15% or so (from my recollection, the typical curves where Talgos are allowed higher speeds are generally posted for P60/T67; there may be a few other variations, but I can't remember and it's been a few years since I had any reason to know this information).
> 
> Almost nobody is going to make it around a 30 mph curve going 80 mph, regardless of the type of equipment used.
Click to expand...

That is what the news this morning is saying. It was a 30 zone and the train was doing 80.


----------



## A Voice

Jbpdx said:


> Access road where something could have been dumped on the track.


With the 80 mph overspeed into the curve effectively confirmed by the NTSB, the train would have derailed regardless. I am only speculating, but a good guess is the objects hit actually refer to after the train left the tracks. Also curious is that the train had apparently not slowed at all from track speed; Even heading into the curve at 40-50 mph might well have avoided anything happening.

What strikes me about this derailment is the number of injuries. In a many major passenger train wrecks, there are often a relative handful of fatalities (even one is too many, of course), a much larger number of injured, but generally many persons who walk away unhurt. Here, that last group seems to be missing. Again just speculation, but likely with a light passenger load most everyone just happened to be in the worst affected cars.

One pertinent question I haven't seen addressed is how similar Talgo trainsets have fared in derailments in Europe.


----------



## RPC

A Voice said:


> What strikes me about this derailment is the number of injuries. In a many major passenger train wrecks, there are often a relative handful of fatalities (even one is too many, of course), a much larger number of injured, but generally many persons who walk away unhurt. Here, that last group seems to be missing. Again just speculation, but likely with a light passenger load most everyone just happened to be in the worst affected cars.


In this case much of the train went off the bridge and onto the highway below, including at least one car that landed upside-down. That's going to cause many more injuries than stopping upright or even going down an embankment.


----------



## frequentflyer

A Voice said:


> Jbpdx said:
> 
> 
> 
> Access road where something could have been dumped on the track.
> 
> 
> 
> With the 80 mph overspeed into the curve effectively confirmed by the NTSB, the train would have derailed regardless. I am only speculating, but a good guess is the objects hit actually refer to after the train left the tracks. Also curious is that the train had apparently not slowed at all from track speed; Even heading into the curve at 40-50 mph might well have avoided anything happening.
> 
> What strikes me about this derailment is the number of injuries. In a many major passenger train wrecks, there are often a relative handful of fatalities (even one is too many, of course), a much larger number of injured, but generally many persons who walk away unhurt. Here, that last group seems to be missing. Again just speculation, but likely with a light passenger load most everyone just happened to be in the worst affected cars.
> 
> One pertinent question I haven't seen addressed is how similar Talgo trainsets have fared in derailments in Europe.
Click to expand...

I will go ahead and ask the question, if this had been a heavier Superliner consist, how would it fared?


----------



## frequentflyer

Seaboard92 said:


> Let's take a moment to reflect on the memory of our two friends from the rail advocacy community that we lost in the accident. RIP Jim And Zach. Let's not forget them in this tragedy.


So sad, so sad.


----------



## VentureForth

I'm trying to go back and find it, but there was a graphic that showed that the first 30 MPH speed limit sign was more than a 1/4 mile prior to the curve.


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17

Which Tacoma station is currently being used? The Tacoma Dome Station would require a backup move to be accessed from the Point Defiance Line.

Sent from my SM-J327P using Amtrak Forum mobile app


----------



## VentureForth

Seaboard92 said:


> Let's take a moment to reflect on the memory of our two friends from the rail advocacy community that we lost in the accident. RIP Jim And Zach. Let's not forget them in this tragedy.


Two of the three fatalities were rail advocates? Crazy. Where were they seated?

Has anyone confirmed the status of the locomotive engineer? Who was contacting dispatch? The conductor or the engineer?


----------



## sitzplatz17

brianpmcdonnell17 said:


> Which Tacoma station is currently being used? The Tacoma Dome Station would require a backup move to be accessed from the Point Defiance Line.
> 
> Sent from my SM-J327P using Amtrak Forum mobile app


From the Amtrak.com website as of 9:30am today (12/19/17):

Service Disruption South of SeattleAmtrak Cascades services impacted

7:00 p.m. PT

Amtrak Cascades Train 501, operating from Seattle and Portland, derailed south of Tacoma, Wash. There were approximately 80 passengers and five crew members on board.

Service from Seattle to points north and east is continuing to operate. Amtrak Cascades Trains 504 and 509 are cancelled. 502 will be cancelled on Tuesday, Dec. 19. No alternate transportation will be available.

*Trains will be operating out of the original Tacoma Station located at 1001 Puyallup Avenue, Tacoma, WA 98421.*


----------



## Seaboard92

VentureForth said:


> Seaboard92 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let's take a moment to reflect on the memory of our two friends from the rail advocacy community that we lost in the accident. RIP Jim And Zach. Let's not forget them in this tragedy.
> 
> 
> 
> Two of the three fatalities were rail advocates? Crazy. Where were they seated?
> Has anyone confirmed the status of the locomotive engineer? Who was contacting dispatch? The conductor or the engineer?
Click to expand...

Conductor, LSA are confirmed among the living. I'm also fairly positive on the engineer as well.

Yes two of three were rail advocates Jim if I remember correct was the head of All Aboard Washington.


----------



## norfolkwesternhenry

well if it had been a superliner consist that had a capacity about the same as a talgo set, then it might have been roughly the same weight because superliner cars, which are much heavier, do have a higher capacity, five superliners can have the same or more capacity as a talgo set if you have mostly coaches, and five superliners, maybe 500 tons(?), is probably about the same as a full talgo set, though with half the brakes. The other thing is superliners have a center of gravity halfway to the moon, and would all have easily flipped over, vs the talgo set, with a center of gravity a mile below in comparison to a Superliner.

*edit, replying to frequentflyer's question about if it had been a superliner consist, didn't quote properly I suspect.


----------



## VentureForth

One thing that keeps being repeated is that this was the first day Amtrak used this route. How long as Sounder been using this route? Not like seeing trains on this route was BRAND new...


----------



## reppin_the_847

RIP to the victims & condolences to everyone affected by this. This brings back memories of the Philadelphia incident. I really hope that this tragedy leads to improvements that will keep folks safe in the future.


----------



## daybeers

CNN has a live video feed of a crane removing the derailed cars from the I-5: https://www.cnn.com/specials/live-video-3


----------



## Green Maned Lion

Im not sure where you are getting your numbers from. The Talgo sets hold 250, the Superliners 75, so you need 4 to match it, 3 would come close. Furthermore, the Superliners COG, while certainly higher than a Talgo, is actually slightly lower than a Amfleet or Horizon because the lower level is sunk relative to a single level. Calling the COG halfway to the moon is something more than hyperbole.

That being said, I do think the Talgos are actually lighter than 4 Superliners, but this is just an impression.

The weird thing about this crash is not that the train derailed; its where it derailed. The force overload happened too quickly. The locomotive should have entered the curve too fast, leaned a bit too far, and then overcome its wheel flange, leaving the track at an angle and leaning somewhat out of the curve, pulling cars with it. The effect would be even more pronounced if the brakes were applied at some point, but it should have happened with out braking force, too.

That is not what happened. What appears to have happened is the locomotive left the track almost immediately tangential to the curve, as if its wheels never evenbriefly followed the curve. 80 is nowhere near fast enough for that. The locomotive appears to have gone straight, dead arrow straight, right off of the track. It didnt appear to barrel roll. A few cars tried to follow it, but at some point the rest of the cars seem to follow the curve.

The physics before me do not make sense without some kind of external actor or equipment malfunction causing bizarre attitude prior to or upon the train entering that curve.


----------



## jamess

The talk of the day is about PTC...

But isnt there an issue with the speed signs used by the railroad? If the engineer didn't see them, that indicates they're too small, or badly placed, or both. Same in Philadelphia.

When a highway goes from 75mph to 30mph, it is signed to hell and back. Maybe the railroads should do a better job with their signage?

Also, it makes no sense that if youre going to spend so much money redoing a track for passenger, you'd leave a 30mph bridge in 79mph territory, when the topology clearly allows for a direct route.


----------



## A Voice

jamess said:


> The talk of the day is about PTC...
> 
> But isnt there an issue with the speed signs used by the railroad? If the engineer didn't see them, that indicates they're too small, or badly placed, or both. Same in Philadelphia.
> 
> When a highway goes from 75mph to 30mph, it is signed to hell and back. Maybe the railroads should do a better job with their signage?
> 
> Also, it makes no sense that if youre going to spend so much money redoing a track for passenger, you'd leave a 30mph bridge in 79mph territory, when the topology clearly allows for a direct route.


Critical difference is that engineers are required to be qualified on a given territory. This isn't like you or me driving an unfamiliar road and missing a sign; Railroad personnel would already be well aware of the upcoming speed restriction.


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17

VentureForth said:


> One thing that keeps being repeated is that this was the first day Amtrak used this route. How long as Sounder been using this route? Not like seeing trains on this route was BRAND new...


Sounded service only goes as far south as Lakewood, which is north of the accident location.
Sent from my SM-J327P using Amtrak Forum mobile app


----------



## TrackWalker

Back in February of 1980 two BN rear locomotives broke loose from a train in the Cascade tunnel and became runaways westbound. They were determined to be traveling over 100 MPH between switches at Scenic. Just past west Scenic they as *entered* a 10 degree left hand curve they hurled off the tracks and *straight* down the mountain stopping just short of Highway 2.

There was no track damage from this event.


----------



## Just-Thinking-51

jamess said:


> Also, it makes no sense that if youre going to spend so much money redoing a track for passenger, you'd leave a 30mph bridge in 79mph territory, when the topology clearly allows for a direct route.


Shortly after the bridge, and the S curve the bridge is part of. There is a merge with another main line track. Its been report the switch is a lower speed switch. So the train traveling by this location needs to be going slow and prepare to stop at the junction anyway. If additional funds were available then the whole S curve and junction could be upgraded to 60 mph speeds. The project did not do so, lack of need, space, and or cost.


----------



## lstone19

Green Maned Lion said:


> The weird thing about this crash is not that the train derailed; its where it derailed. The force overload happened too quickly. The locomotive should have entered the curve too fast, leaned a bit too far, and then overcome its wheel flange, leaving the track at an angle and leaning somewhat out of the curve, pulling cars with it. The effect would be even more pronounced if the brakes were applied at some point, but it should have happened with out braking force, too.
> 
> That is not what happened. What appears to have happened is the locomotive left the track almost immediately tangential to the curve, as if its wheels never evenbriefly followed the curve. 80 is nowhere near fast enough for that. The locomotive appears to have gone straight, dead arrow straight, right off of the track. It didnt appear to barrel roll. A few cars tried to follow it, but at some point the rest of the cars seem to follow the curve.
> 
> The physics before me do not make sense without some kind of external actor or equipment malfunction causing bizarre attitude prior to or upon the train entering that curve.


Along with that is the lack of major track damage. I would have expected the track to be torn up with the force of the lead unit trying to take the curve at too high a speed causing the outer rail to pull out and/or turn over. Instead, probably due to the train having gone into emergency (either by engineer action or it coming apart), the trailing unit was going slow enough and without significant track damage that it apparently stayed on the rails (I’ve yet to see anything saying it’s actually not derailed so I’ll leave open the possibility that it is derailed but in line with the rails). It’s as if the lead unit flew over the rails.

Sent from my iPad using Amtrak Forum


----------



## frequentflyer

norfolkwesternhenry said:


> well if it had been a superliner consist that had a capacity about the same as a talgo set, then it might have been roughly the same weight because superliner cars, which are much heavier, do have a higher capacity, five superliners can have the same or more capacity as a talgo set if you have mostly coaches, and five superliners, maybe 500 tons(?), is probably about the same as a full talgo set, though with half the brakes. The other thing is superliners have a center of gravity halfway to the moon, and would all have easily flipped over, vs the talgo set, with a center of gravity a mile below in comparison to a Superliner.
> 
> *edit, replying to frequentflyer's question about if it had been a superliner consist, didn't quote properly I suspect.


A Eagle Superliner consist derailed in Arkansas at speed and stayed upright, it was some time ago. Its an urban myth that the Superliner is top heavy. Trains had a nice detailed article and plans in a 1979 issue. The heavy AC and other equipment is relatively low in comparison to the height of the car. And the car connects to the boogie at axle level. A lot of engineering went into the Superliner to make it not top heavy.

Apparently one of the Cascades trains is using subbing a Superliner consist for some reason, so the question came to mind. And I wander how a heavier car would have fared going into the trees.


----------



## jis

VentureForth said:


> I'm trying to go back and find it, but there was a graphic that showed that the first 30 MPH speed limit sign was more than a 1/4 mile prior to the curve.


There is a speed limit warning sign more than a mile back from the start of the curve, and a speed limit sign at the beginning of the curve. But all that is more of ralfan interest, since a qualified Engineer should be able to operate a train safely even if one or more of those signs are missing.



A Voice said:


> jamess said:
> 
> 
> 
> The talk of the day is about PTC...
> 
> But isnt there an issue with the speed signs used by the railroad? If the engineer didn't see them, that indicates they're too small, or badly placed, or both. Same in Philadelphia.
> 
> When a highway goes from 75mph to 30mph, it is signed to hell and back. Maybe the railroads should do a better job with their signage?
> 
> Also, it makes no sense that if youre going to spend so much money redoing a track for passenger, you'd leave a 30mph bridge in 79mph territory, when the topology clearly allows for a direct route.
> 
> 
> 
> Critical difference is that engineers are required to be qualified on a given territory. This isn't like you or me driving an unfamiliar road and missing a sign; Railroad personnel would already be well aware of the upcoming speed restriction.
Click to expand...

Absolutely! As Acela150 I am sure will remind us, like he did after the 188 accident, it is the business of the qualified crew (Engineer and Conductor) to know exactly where the train is and what operating restrictions are active at that point, and moreover what conditions they should prepare for that will apply ahead of them.

With reference to the NEC, it should be noted that the few speed limit signs that you see are really not what reflects the speed limit that is enforced, since there are five different classes of trains on the NEC, each with different set of speed limits. What reflects the speed limit is the section of track, the active signal aspect, the civil speed limit, if any, together with the class of the train.

The in cab signal display indicates the speed limit in force for the specific class of train based on information picked up by the train from the signal in force, track mounted transponders and radio messages from the ACSES system, with a fall back on the classic coded track circuit based cab signaling system.

At the time the 188 accident occurred, that area did not have the ACSES overlay active yet, and the cab signal system was not set up to reflect a speed limit of the curve. This was not unusual back then. Amtrak was then in the process of re-jigging the cab signal system towards reflecting such. That curve was not done yet in that direction mainly because it was believed (incorrectly) that a train could not accelerate to such high speeds by that point. That assumption was true with previous less performant equipment, but the Sprinters' acceleration capabilities changed the rules of the game. But that is all well documented history. Let us please not go through yet another cycle of that discussion here.

The bottom line is, if you are focused on speed limit signs you are mostly barking up the wrong tree and wasting your time and energy. The presence of a little sign is most likely not going to have much effect on the general loss of situational awareness, if that is what is determined to be the cause of this. Remember, there are other possibilities to consider like various possible modes of equipment failure too.


----------



## Devil's Advocate

Assuming overspeed is confirmed to be the primary catalyst I suppose the root cause could include...

Loss of situational awareness

Medical complication or impairment

Mechanical failure or sabotage

Structural failure or sabotage

Operational failure or sabotage

Are there any obvious options I'm still missing?

My money is on the loss of situational awareness, possibly due to an unexpected/unwanted distraction and/or the relative newness of the route, in conjunction with an unusually brief segment for rapid deceleration.


----------



## VentureForth

Cheaper than PTS:


----------



## KmH

niemi24s said:


> The line below is tangent to the track and ends up at about the position of the lead locomotive:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Scene 2.jpg
> 
> Imagery date per Google Earth is 5/22/17 and appears to be more recent than the one in Post # 196.


The Charger destroyed the signal tower that can be seen on that photo - before the added yellow line.We can see the destroyed tower, then where the loco then glanced to the left a bit off the embankment past the tower and in front of the silver box, in the photo in post # 167.

The Charger took out some trees and angled left a bit down onto I-5.

That all makes it look like the train came off the rails at the very start of the curve.


----------



## Lonestar648

In viewing the media stories on line, I found ABC had a video that shows the position of the car and how they came to rest they way they did. The video shows the lead engine going off the track at the beginning of the bridge. Looking at the photos, post crash, clearly shows the tracks in the dirt long before the bridge. Also, some stories are equating the Conductor and the Engineer as the same person. It looks like the media is ready to convict. Waiting for the NTSB takes too long for the media in order to get the facts.


----------



## jamess

A Voice said:


> jamess said:
> 
> 
> 
> The talk of the day is about PTC...
> 
> But isnt there an issue with the speed signs used by the railroad? If the engineer didn't see them, that indicates they're too small, or badly placed, or both. Same in Philadelphia.
> 
> When a highway goes from 75mph to 30mph, it is signed to hell and back. Maybe the railroads should do a better job with their signage?
> 
> Also, it makes no sense that if youre going to spend so much money redoing a track for passenger, you'd leave a 30mph bridge in 79mph territory, when the topology clearly allows for a direct route.
> 
> 
> 
> Critical difference is that engineers are required to be qualified on a given territory. This isn't like you or me driving an unfamiliar road and missing a sign; Railroad personnel would already be well aware of the upcoming speed restriction.
Click to expand...

Well thats the theory, it clearly hasnt panned out as planned.

Spending another $100 on a big ass speed sign seems like the prudent option when switching from 79mph to 30mph.


----------



## dlagrua

We are only talking theories here but the trains speed going into the curve has to be an issue. This accident gives credence to the argument that all Amtrak trains should have both an engineer and a conductor in the cab. It only takes one distraction for an accident to happen. This is certainly better than placing the burden on one man. Isn't this why planes have a co-pilot? It also needs to be asked how many times the engineer has run this route and how familiar he was with it?


----------



## crescent-zephyr

It seems very odd that brakes were never applied.. A 30 mph curve could have probably handled a 40-50 mph train... For sure it wouldn't have been this bad.

While situational awareness may have led the engineer on a new route to be going too fast leading up to the curve... You would think seeing the curve itself would have led to a brake application (as was the case in Pennsylvania).

I am in no way placing blame on anyone... It just seems very odd.

I'll also echo GML's thoughts that I wouldn't expect the engine to derail the way it did... I would have expected it to start into the curve way more than it did.

In the year(s) to come this will be a very interesting accident report to read.


----------



## jis

KmH said:


> niemi24s said:
> 
> 
> 
> The line below is tangent to the track and ends up at about the position of the lead locomotive:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Scene 2.jpg
> 
> Imagery date per Google Earth is 5/22/17 and appears to be more recent than the one in Post # 196.
> 
> 
> 
> The Charger destroyed the signal tower that can be seen on that photo - before the added yellow line.We can see the destroyed tower, then where the loco then glanced to the left a bit off the embankment past the tower and in front of the silver box, in the photo in post # 167.
> 
> The Charger took out some trees and angled left a bit down onto I-5.
> 
> That all makes it look like the train came off the rails at the very start of the curve.
Click to expand...

We do not know exactly what hit that tower and knocked it down. It could have been a jackknifing car or the locomotive. We will have to await NTSB's reconstruction of events.

Here is a neat simulation that has been presented based on the available photographing evidence.



be aware though that this is not based on deep analysis. For that we have to wait for the NTSB to complete its work.


----------



## jamess

crescent-zephyr said:


> While situational awareness may have led the engineer on a new route to be going too fast leading up to the curve... You would think seeing the curve itself would have led to a brake application (as was the case in Pennsylvania).


I feel that because the route is new, you'd be extra aware of your surroundings, especially knowing the media and suits are involved.

People "zone out" when a task becomes redundant and they become over confident.


----------



## greatcats

Don’t want to speculate too much, but a previous poster mentioned the engineer might have been under pressure to hurry up. I see the time for Olympia-Lacey is 7:15 am for Train 501. The accident occurred at 7:34 am, about 12-14 miles from Olympia. That would mean the train was running at least 30 Minutes late.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## Rover

Cho Cho Charlie said:


> The inaugural run was suppose to highlight just how much time the $180.7 million project shaved off the old/previous travel time. I have to wonder if the engineer was under pressure to do the run as fast as possible, so that the supporters could brag (show off) that the project was indeed worth it.


Well now, that, if true, reminds me of the time pressures of a Captain Edward John Smith on the inaugural run of the White Star Line ship, the RMS Titanic. But I digress...


----------



## Cho Cho Charlie

Green Maned Lion said:


> The weird thing about this crash is not that the train derailed; its where it derailed. The force overload happened too quickly. The locomotive should have entered the curve too fast, leaned a bit too far, and then overcome its wheel flange, leaving the track at an angle and leaning somewhat out of the curve, pulling cars with it. The effect would be even more pronounced if the brakes were applied at some point, but it should have happened with out braking force, too.
> 
> That is not what happened. What appears to have happened is the locomotive left the track almost immediately tangential to the curve, as if its wheels never evenbriefly followed the curve. 80 is nowhere near fast enough for that. The locomotive appears to have gone straight, dead arrow straight, right off of the track. It didnt appear to barrel roll. A few cars tried to follow it, but at some point the rest of the cars seem to follow the curve.
> 
> The physics before me do not make sense without some kind of external actor or equipment malfunction causing bizarre attitude prior to or upon the train entering that curve.


As always, news reports should be taken lightly, but I just saw a news guy doing a crash analysis, and he mentioned that the Charger left the tracks just where the new concrete ties end, and the old wooden ties start.


----------



## PerRock

VentureForth said:


> One thing that keeps being repeated is that this was the first day Amtrak used this route. How long as Sounder been using this route? Not like seeing trains on this route was BRAND new...


Not quite, this is the first revenue run for Amtrak on this route. They've been running test trains on the line for the last week or so.

peter


----------



## Ryan

Also, Sounder doesn’t go south if Lakewood, so they wouldn’t ever traverse the site of the derailment.


----------



## jis

Another factor is that apparently there was a second person in the cab who would normally not be there. So there is the issue of distraction that is now relevant too.

I also learned that there is a pretty sharp downgrade approaching the curve, making the exercise of braking to the right speed that much more challenging. Apparently unless you start slowing down from about two miles out you are unlikely to succeed arriving at the curve at the right speed. For this there is a speed warning board two miles out.


----------



## fairviewroad

greatcats said:


> Don’t want to speculate too much, but a previous poster mentioned the engineer might have been under pressure to hurry up. I see the time for Olympia-Lacey is 7:15 am for Train 501. The accident occurred at 7:34 am, about 12-14 miles from Olympia. That would mean the train was running at least 30 Minutes late.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


It departed SEA 10 minutes late due to mechanical issue (according to a press report). It left TAC 32 minutes late. 

I would assume the station stop in TAC was longer than usual due to the higher number of people detraining there. That's where quite a few media crews got off the train, having interviewed passengers between SEA and TAC (and presumably being picked up by colleagues or taking a Sounder back to SEA).

So, yeah, there may have been some internalized pressure to make up that time. I don't know for sure, but I think there's less padding in the new schedule? Before, you could leave VAN 15-20 minutes late and still essentially be on time into PDX.


----------



## Ryan

ID of one fatality released (Zach):

http://www.king5.com/mobile/article/news/local/first-amtrak-derailment-victim-identified-as-pierce-transit-employee/281-500638211


----------



## jis

Ryan said:


> ID of one fatality released (Zach):
> 
> http://www.king5.com/mobile/article/news/local/first-amtrak-derailment-victim-identified-as-pierce-transit-employee/281-500638211


Zach and Jim were best of friends, often traveling together, by train of course.

Here is an article that announces, among other things, Jim Hamre's unfortunate passing away in the accident. Announced by his brother Michael.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/19/us/amtrak-derailment-washington.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0


----------



## Jbpdx

The curve is not sharp. Looks very gradual.

Have they interviewed the engineer yet? Is there video from the engine? I don’t buy the “hurry up” explanation.

If it was physical sabotage, what would be possible scenarios?


----------



## jis

Jbpdx said:


> The curve is not sharp. Looks very gradual.


Perhaps the route managers who posted a 30mph speed limit might disagree with you





It is a 750'/8+ degrees curve. Maybe in some books it is not sharp, bu it is plenty sharp for trying to negotiate it at 80mph.


----------



## jis

"Zack Willhoite & Jim Hamre: A Tribute to the Amtrak Crash Victims"

http://heavy.com/news/2017/12/zack-willhoite-jim-hamre-amtrak-victims-photos-derailment/


----------



## daybeers

Amtrak released a Service Disruption Alert at 9:30 AM PST (12:30 PM EST): https://www.amtrak.com/alert/service-disruption-south-of-seattle.html


----------



## Cho Cho Charlie

Jbpdx said:


> Have they interviewed the engineer yet? Is there video from the engine? I don’t buy the “hurry up” explanation.


All I have seen so far, is that the engineer has head injuries and his eyes are both swollen shut. IMHO, he might not be extensively grilled by authorities until those injuries have had a chance to heal a bit. Likewise, the only video mentioned so far, is from the Amtrak engine at the rear of the consist, showing only where the train has already been.


----------



## fairviewroad

daybeers said:


> Amtrak released a Service Disruption Alert at 9:30 AM PST (12:30 PM EST): https://www.amtrak.com/alert/service-disruption-south-of-seattle.html


Well, this (partially) answers the question of how they were planning to maintain the new frequency level given that one trainset will be out of service indefinitely (if not scrapped entirely).



> Beginning Dec. 20, Cascades Service from Eugene to Portland, OR will be operating with substitute equipment and limited amenities, including no food service, checked baggage service, business class or bikes. Pets will still be allowed on board. Additionally, Trains 505 and 508, which were scheduled to operate as thru service between Eugene and Seattle, will now operate only between Seattle and Portland. New Trains 515 and 510 will be introduced on the segment between Portland and Eugene and will be a cross platform connection at Portland for passengers traveling north of Portland.


Any theories on what this means, specifically the "substitute equipment"? I assume it's the short Superliner set that sometimes runs between SEA and VAC when one of the Talgo sets is being worked on.

The new temporary schedule is already posted on the Amtrak website. It's marked as being effective Dec. 20 - Jan 2, but it's hard to imagine what will be different by Jan 2. The wrecked set surely won't be back in service by then?


----------



## CCC1007

fairviewroad said:


> daybeers said:
> 
> 
> 
> Amtrak released a Service Disruption Alert at 9:30 AM PST (12:30 PM EST): https://www.amtrak.com/alert/service-disruption-south-of-seattle.html
> 
> 
> 
> Well, this (partially) answers the question of how they were planning to maintain the new frequency level given that one trainset will be out of service indefinitely (if not scrapped entirely).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Beginning Dec. 20, Cascades Service from Eugene to Portland, OR will be operating with substitute equipment and limited amenities, including no food service, checked baggage service, business class or bikes. Pets will still be allowed on board. Additionally, Trains 505 and 508, which were scheduled to operate as thru service between Eugene and Seattle, will now operate only between Seattle and Portland. New Trains 515 and 510 will be introduced on the segment between Portland and Eugene and will be a cross platform connection at Portland for passengers traveling north of Portland.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Any theories on what this means, specifically the "substitute equipment"? I assume it's the short Superliner set that sometimes runs between SEA and VAC when one of the Talgo sets is being worked on.
> 
> The new temporary schedule is already posted on the Amtrak website. It's marked as being effective Dec. 20 - Jan 2, but it's hard to imagine what will be different by Jan 2. The wrecked set surely won't be back in service by then?
Click to expand...

Could they be looking to lease the Wisconsin sets as a stopgap while they look at their options?

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## Jbpdx

Not sure if this is the same train model or what the curve radius is at the bridge. This is from Talgo for the Talgo XXI diesel tilting train:


----------



## zephyr17

VentureForth said:


> One thing that keeps being repeated is that this was the first day Amtrak used this route. How long as Sounder been using this route? Not like seeing trains on this route was BRAND new...


Sounder service ends at Lakewood. Service south of Lakewood on the the Point Defiance Bypass (AKA Prarie Line), where the accident occurred, actually IS brand new.


----------



## fairviewroad

CCC1007 said:


> Could they be looking to lease the Wisconsin sets as a stopgap while they look at their options?


Hmmm. It's hard to imagine an arrangement like that coming together in less than 36 hours, but maybe they've put out some initial feelers. Even under the best-case scenario I find it difficult to see that equipment getting out here, and (presumably) tested on the route, in time to go into service by Jan 2.

My guess is that the Jan 2nd date allows them to get through the holiday travel period with some degree of certainty. The temporary schedule could easily be extended. There are probably others on here with a higher level of knowledge about possible options going forward.


----------



## Rover

Jbpdx said:


> Not sure if this is the same train model or what the curve radius is at the bridge. This is from Talgo for the Talgo XXI diesel tilting train:


What use is this data, if the lead engine, the Siemens Charger diesel-electric, doesn't have the same curve performance as the Talgo cars??


----------



## TrackWalker

Jbpdx said:


> Not sure if this is the same train model or what the curve radius is at the bridge. This is from Talgo for the Talgo XXI diesel tilting train:


Talgo promotional speeds are more likely higher than allowable FRA track standard speeds for curves and BNSF track engineering standards (which I presume is what Sound Transit built to) which is even slower than FRA


----------



## west point

The engineer and conductor were qualified. However how long ago was their last trip(s) over a new route ?


----------



## VentureForth

Cho Cho Charlie said:


> Green Maned Lion said:
> 
> 
> 
> The weird thing about this crash is not that the train derailed; its where it derailed. The force overload happened too quickly. The locomotive should have entered the curve too fast, leaned a bit too far, and then overcome its wheel flange, leaving the track at an angle and leaning somewhat out of the curve, pulling cars with it. The effect would be even more pronounced if the brakes were applied at some point, but it should have happened with out braking force, too.
> 
> That is not what happened. What appears to have happened is the locomotive left the track almost immediately tangential to the curve, as if its wheels never evenbriefly followed the curve. 80 is nowhere near fast enough for that. The locomotive appears to have gone straight, dead arrow straight, right off of the track. It didnt appear to barrel roll. A few cars tried to follow it, but at some point the rest of the cars seem to follow the curve.
> 
> The physics before me do not make sense without some kind of external actor or equipment malfunction causing bizarre attitude prior to or upon the train entering that curve.
> 
> 
> 
> As always, news reports should be taken lightly, but I just saw a news guy doing a crash analysis, and he mentioned that the Charger left the tracks just where the new concrete ties end, and the old wooden ties start.
Click to expand...

I dunno. Based on this photo, the concrete ties end before the curve. I can't imagine the majority of the cars derailing tangent to the curve as opposed to making significant impact to the earthwork if it had gone straight.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/19/us/amtrak-derailment-washington.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0


----------



## Green Maned Lion

I’m wondering if they are benching the Talgo equipment entirely.


----------



## Anderson

I'm just guessing, but it sounds like most of the fatalities are going to wind up being in the Business Class car (since I rather strongly suspect that Jim and Zach would have been in BC...the upgrade cost on the Cascades tends to be relatively trivial and I know that Charlie, at least, tends to upgrade)...which probably means that it was the BC cars that got totally wrecked (Charlie said that two of the cars are sufficiently damaged to be write-offs, with the rest of the set in varying degrees of bad shape).


----------



## jis

Jbpdx said:


> Not sure if this is the same train model or what the curve radius is at the bridge. This is from Talgo for the Talgo XXI diesel tilting train:


750' is a bit less than 250m give or take. So the speed limit for Talgo with European style super-elevation presumably, is around 70kph that is less than 50mph. Then one has to take into consideration that the locomotives are standard US rolling stock and not Talgo special, so their limiting speed is probably lower.

Additionally FRA does not allow as much super-elevation in the US, so that 30mph sounds about right for the speed limit on that curve.

Once the lead engine has gone off on a tangent, the train behind it is bound to follow.


----------



## rspenmoll

What I dont understand is, why was a newly constructed line allowed to open without positive train control in place?


----------



## Anderson

fairviewroad said:


> CCC1007 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Could they be looking to lease the Wisconsin sets as a stopgap while they look at their options?
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmm. It's hard to imagine an arrangement like that coming together in less than 36 hours, but maybe they've put out some initial feelers. Even under the best-case scenario I find it difficult to see that equipment getting out here, and (presumably) tested on the route, in time to go into service by Jan 2.
> 
> My guess is that the Jan 2nd date allows them to get through the holiday travel period with some degree of certainty. The temporary schedule could easily be extended. There are probably others on here with a higher level of knowledge about possible options going forward.
Click to expand...

Looking over the stand-in schedule, it looks like they're running a Superliner set (sans cafe) on the Oregon portion of the route. Everything else looks like it's roughly the new frequency levels. That suggests, reading even deeper between the lines than is healthy, that it _may _have been an Oregon-owned set that crashed. Of course, maintaining a predictable service level between Seattle and Portland is likely a significant reason to do this, too.

And I agree that the dates are probably to give them time to sort out what can be done longer-term, though I wouldn't be surprised to see them just bite the bullet on the Wisconsin Talgos at this stage, even as a short-to-medium term lease.


----------



## Anderson

rspenmoll said:


> What I dont understand is, why was a newly constructed line allowed to open without positive train control in place?


From what reports are saying, PTC was _in place_ but it wasn't _active_. Which, if Sound Transit owns the line, means that there's a good chance this will be landing on their doorstep (e.g. "Why wasn't it active?" comes to mind, especially if the engineers were advised "The system will tell you when to slow down for that curve").


----------



## VentureForth

I guess what it all comes down to is 1) Was the engineer distracted and did he miss the speed limit sign. If yes, Engineer's fault is most likely. If no, then 2) If the brake was applied, did it malfunction? If yes, mechanical failure. If no, then it's anyone's guess.

It appears through all the photos that I've seen that there is no evidence whatsoever of there being any fouling or sabotage to the track itself.


----------



## PRR 60

Anderson said:


> Looking over the stand-in schedule, it looks like they're running a Superliner set (sans cafe) on the Oregon portion of the route. Everything else looks like it's roughly the new frequency levels. That suggests, reading even deeper between the lines than is healthy, that it _may _have been an Oregon-owned set that crashed. Of course, maintaining a predictable service level between Seattle and Portland is likely a significant reason to do this, too.
> 
> And I agree that the dates are probably to give them time to sort out what can be done longer-term, though I wouldn't be surprised to see them just bite the bullet on the Wisconsin Talgos at this stage, even as a short-to-medium term lease.


The set that crashed was the Mt. Adams - the former Las Vegas set now owned by Washington State.


----------



## niemi24s

This is the same image as in Post #197 but with a line added to show the continuation of the straight stretch ending at the start of the curve:




The lower arrow points to the approximate position and orientation of the lead locomotive.


----------



## CCC1007

Green Maned Lion said:


> I’m wondering if they are benching the Talgo equipment entirely.


Not very likely.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## Bierboy

NTSB now saying that there was an employee-in-training in the cab with the engineer.


----------



## Rover

Bierboy said:


> NTSB now saying that there was an employee-in-training in the cab with the engineer.


A conductor in training, they said.

The NTSB also said the front facing camera on the front engine was badly damaged and is being sent to HQ to extract what they can.

They said the crew interviews will happen in the next couple of days.


----------



## daybeers

"Day Two" update from Washington State Patrol's blog: https://wspinsideout.wordpress.com/2017/12/19/day-two-mounts-road-train-derailment/

Looks like all the railcars have been removed from the scene, and it seems they're working on removing the Charger from the roadway. WSDOT says it is unlikely I-5 southbound will be opened by Wednesday's morning commute.


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

AmtrakBlue said:


> CSXfoamer1997 said:
> 
> 
> 
> WSDOT #1402 was wrecked this morning when it derailed while hauling Amtrak Cascades #501 on an inaugural run on the new Cascades route. Sadly, 9 passengers were killed and 77 passengers and car motorists sustained injuries. It seems like it's irreparable, but at least the design of it saved the engineer's life, thanks to Siemens!
> 
> My thoughts and prayers go to those affected by the accident, as well as the friends and families of those that were killed.
> 
> 
> 
> Where are you hearing 9 were killed. Initial reports said 6 but thats been downgraded to 3.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum
Click to expand...

I asked the same thing in a comment on a Facebook post. "How'd it go from 3 deaths, to 6, to 9, and now back to 3?"


----------



## Don Newcomb

daybeers said:


> ..... and it seems they're working on removing the Charger from the roadway. WSDOT says it is unlikely I-5 southbound will be opened by Wednesday's morning commute.


Yeah, something north of 100 tons is not easy to pick up and pack out.


----------



## Ryan

Amazingly enough, information flow is really challenging in these types of incidents. It's completely unsurprising that basic facts like this are in flux for a bit as things are unfolding. Yet another reason to sit back and watch events unfold, rather than chase down rabbit holes of discussion over "facts" that turn out to be untrue.


----------



## west point

Yes will need one of those multiple axel low boys. Highway overpass clearances a definite problem. Anyone remember the height of a SC-44 then add the low boy height.


----------



## MattW

Even if the PTC on the line segment was ready to be switched on, could they have switched it on without the PTC on the line it connects to being online?


----------



## junebug

So sad for Jim and Zach. Did either one ever post on this forum?


----------



## jis

MattW said:


> Even if the PTC on the line segment was ready to be switched on, could they have switched it on without the PTC on the line it connects to being online?


Yes. On the NEC they switched on ACSES, i.e. PTC, in a segments at a time. Some were relatively short segments and some were long ones.


----------



## fairviewroad

Anderson said:


> Of course, maintaining a predictable service level between Seattle and Portland is likely a significant reason to do this, too.


Since they are not offering cafe service or Business Class service on the replacement train sets, it's easy to see why they want them to be marooned south of PDX. The cafe as well as BC seem to do very well between SEA and PDX. South of PDX, not so much. I've been on BC south of PDX a couple of times and it's a lonely place. But it's frequently sold out north of PDX. They'd be leaving a lot of money on the table if they didn't have that as an option, especially during the upcoming holiday travel period when it's not unusual for coach to sell out on the SEA-PDX section.



CSXfoamer1997 said:


> I asked the same thing in a comment on a Facebook post. "How'd it go from 3 deaths, to 6, to 9, and now back to 3?"


It didn't. The only officially announced death toll was three. Any other numbers were from unnamed sources that reporters mistakenly assumed to be knowledgeable about the situation.


----------



## KmH

It is amazing how many reporters apparently don't know the editor's ASSUME adage:

If you assume you'll make an ASS out of U and ME.


----------



## cirdan

Green Maned Lion said:


> Im not sure where you are getting your numbers from. The Talgo sets hold 250, the Superliners 75, so you need 4 to match it, 3 would come close. Furthermore, the Superliners COG, while certainly higher than a Talgo, is actually slightly lower than a Amfleet or Horizon because the lower level is sunk relative to a single level. Calling the COG halfway to the moon is something more than hyperbole.
> 
> That being said, I do think the Talgos are actually lighter than 4 Superliners, but this is just an impression.
> 
> The weird thing about this crash is not that the train derailed; its where it derailed. The force overload happened too quickly. The locomotive should have entered the curve too fast, leaned a bit too far, and then overcome its wheel flange, leaving the track at an angle and leaning somewhat out of the curve, pulling cars with it. The effect would be even more pronounced if the brakes were applied at some point, but it should have happened with out braking force, too.
> 
> That is not what happened. What appears to have happened is the locomotive left the track almost immediately tangential to the curve, as if its wheels never evenbriefly followed the curve. 80 is nowhere near fast enough for that. The locomotive appears to have gone straight, dead arrow straight, right off of the track. It didnt appear to barrel roll. A few cars tried to follow it, but at some point the rest of the cars seem to follow the curve.
> 
> The physics before me do not make sense without some kind of external actor or equipment malfunction causing bizarre attitude prior to or upon the train entering that curve.


With talgo cars having come to rest on both sides of the curve, and some randomly arranged on the track, what i expect is that, as you say, the locomotive went off the track tangentially and probably at first the first few cars went with it. But the pictures show there was no talgo car attached to the locomotive or near it so I assume that coupler gave way fairly early on. The train, with its brakes full on, was decelerating much faster than the lead locomotive. The back of the train (still on the track) pushed into the (derailed) front of the train and it essentially hit itself which is what caused the cars to jacknife and even deflect onto the inner side of the curve..


----------



## cirdan

Devil's Advocate said:


> Assuming overspeed is confirmed to be the primary catalyst I suppose the root cause could include...
> 
> Loss of situational awareness
> 
> Medical complication or impairment
> 
> Mechanical failure or sabotage
> 
> Structural failure or sabotage
> 
> Operational failure or sabotage
> 
> Are there any obvious options I'm still missing?
> 
> My money is on the loss of situational awareness, possibly due to an unexpected/unwanted distraction and/or the relative newness of the route, in conjunction with an unusually brief segment for rapid deceleration.


Seeing this was an inaugural run it is not entirely impossible that VIps were invited to travel on the locomotive, or invited themselves.

I guess most of us railfans have at some point been allowed to ride with the engineer on a train, but we know how important it is not to distract the engineer and we wouldn't initiate casual conversation of do anything that might cause distraction.

VIps on the other hand, used to being the center of attention all the time. You know, Driving a train? That looks easy. Let me try.


----------



## cirdan

CSXfoamer1997 said:


> AmtrakBlue said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CSXfoamer1997 said:
> 
> 
> 
> WSDOT #1402 was wrecked this morning when it derailed while hauling Amtrak Cascades #501 on an inaugural run on the new Cascades route. Sadly, 9 passengers were killed and 77 passengers and car motorists sustained injuries. It seems like it's irreparable, but at least the design of it saved the engineer's life, thanks to Siemens!
> 
> My thoughts and prayers go to those affected by the accident, as well as the friends and families of those that were killed.
> 
> 
> 
> Where are you hearing 9 were killed. Initial reports said 6 but thats been downgraded to 3.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I asked the same thing in a comment on a Facebook post. "How'd it go from 3 deaths, to 6, to 9, and now back to 3?"
Click to expand...


It's quite usual actually after major disasters, that the death count recedes somewhat as the dust settles.

All sorts of glitches can happen leading to double counting, Also people missing can quickly be assumed dead if say their belongings are retrieved from a badly damaged part oif the train but their body's aren't. Rescue teams then assume the worst. Sometimes people will walk away from a scene and make their own way home and only contact the authorities later. Sometimes people may use different variants of their name, or their name can get mis-spelled or mis-communicated leading to the impression that they are two separate individuals.

Lots of things like this can and do happen.


----------



## XHRTSP

I was considering trying to take this train to be part of the inaugural run. My last flight on the 17th (IST-SNN-ATL) was delayed multiple times, and had I stayed on time I most likely would have gotten stuck in the Atlanta fiasco anyway. This is definitely a black eye for the Cascades.


----------



## lo2e

west point said:


> Yes will need one of those multiple axel low boys. Highway overpass clearances a definite problem. Anyone remember the height of a SC-44 then add the low boy height.


I know absolutely nil about the process of cleaning up an accident like this - would it be at all possible to put the loco on its side on a low boy in order to make sure it clears underpasses?


----------



## AmtrakBlue

lo2e said:


> west point said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes will need one of those multiple axel low boys. Highway overpass clearances a definite problem. Anyone remember the height of a SC-44 then add the low boy height.
> 
> 
> 
> I know absolutely nil about the process of cleaning up an accident like this - would it be at all possible to put the loco on its side on a low boy in order to make sure it clears underpasses?
Click to expand...

I’m pretty sure I’ve seen engines on their sides on trucks after they were involved in derailments.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## John Bobinyec

I think they'd load the engine upright on a lowboy, without its trucks, which are detachable.

jb


----------



## jis

Latest (12/20 morning) from NTSB says that no brake application was initiated at the approach to the curve. The first brake application happened automatically. So everyone is pretty puzzled about why.


----------



## frequentflyer

jis said:


> Latest (12/20 morning) from NTSB says that no brake application was initiated at the approach to the curve. The first brake application happened automatically. So everyone is pretty puzzled about why.


Looking more and more like situational awareness. "Where am I?"


----------



## jis

Amtrak CEO Anderson's Presser in Tacoma on 12/19 regarding the Cascades derailment:

http://www.king5.com/video/news/local/amtrak-ceo-speaks-in-tacoma/281-2842786

How Amtrak is handling the customer side of this incident is a class act compared to what was done after the 188 event under the previous leadership. Perhaps we have the much maligned airline culture to thank for this?

Anderson also emphasized the issue of "safety culture", again perhaps something from the airline culture showing through? He was not shy about mentioning that his transportation experince is from the airline industry and he is new to railroads.


----------



## A Voice

frequentflyer said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> 
> Latest (12/20 morning) from NTSB says that no brake application was initiated at the approach to the curve. The first brake application happened automatically. So everyone is pretty puzzled about why.
> 
> 
> 
> Looking more and more like situational awareness. "Where am I?"
Click to expand...

Possibly, but with a lack of situational awareness you would tend to expect a last second (much too late) emergency brake application when you finally become aware you're heading into that curve. This truly is rather puzzling.

It will be interesting to hear what the engineer has to say. I can think of one or two possibilities of what might have happened in that cab (not the first time, sadly), but just wild speculation at this point.


----------



## norfolkwesternhenry

The fact that no brakes were applied puzzles me, because the engineer yelled emergency emergency we are on the ground but it sounded as if he put the train into emergency and was declaring he had braked and then the train derailed, but I could (and probably am) be wrong.


----------



## George K

norfolkwesternhenry said:


> The fact that no brakes were applied puzzles me, because the engineer yelled emergency emergency we are on the ground


I believe that was the conductor whose voice you heard.


----------



## norfolkwesternhenry

I would think it's the engineer as he says we are on the ground and then says we are on the highway, not sure where the conductor was in the train could have been on the cars that were on the highway, but I'm guessing it was the engineer.

Also, whoever it was, thought they were at milepost 20-21, but the detector that they went over maybe 10 seconds before the derailment, said milepost 26.4, maybe they really didn't know where they were.

Last thing before the derailment was Amtrak 501 entering centrailia north, but without any pause, says emergency emergency

*edit, they guy who said emergency emergency later said "I'll check with my conductor" which I'd think would indicate he was the engineer. Or there were two conductors, which is always a possibility.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

norfolkwesternhenry said:


> I would think it's the engineer as he says we are on the ground and then says we are on the highway, not sure where the conductor was in the train could have been on the cars that were on the highway, but I'm guessing it was the engineer.
> 
> Also, whoever it was, thought they were at milepost 20-21, but the detector that they went over maybe 10 seconds before the derailment, said milepost 26.4, maybe they really didn't know where they were.
> 
> Last thing before the derailment was Amtrak 501 entering centrailia north, but without any pause, says emergency emergency
> 
> *edit, they guy who said emergency emergency later said "I'll check with my conductor" which I'd think would indicate he was the engineer. Or there were two conductors, which is always a possibility.


There was a conductor trainee in the cab learning the route. That may have been who called it in. The engineer was pretty badly hurt (head injuries) so s/he may not have been able to call it in.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## jis

Remember there was a Conductor in the cab on a qualifying run. So there were two people in the cab, the Engineer and the Conductor on a qualifying run. The Conductor on duty on the train was of course in the body of the train, not in the engine.


----------



## George K

jis said:


> Remember there was a Conductor in the cab on a qualifying run. So there were two people in the cab, the Engineer and the Conductor on a qualifying run. The Conductor on duty on the train was of course in the body of the train, not in the engine.


Ah - that makes sense.


----------



## crescent-zephyr

In the recording, The original caller to the dispatcher clealry says "this is the conductor" - which would be THE conductor. 

Calling "emergency" three times over the radio is common railroad practice in order to clear the radio of other communications to allow the dispatcher to communicate with the train in an emergency situation. It has nothing to do with the trains emergency brakes being applied.


----------



## TrackWalker

XHRTSP said:


> I was considering trying to take this train to be part of the inaugural run. My last flight on the 17th (IST-SNN-ATL) was delayed multiple times, and had I stayed on time I most likely would have gotten stuck in the Atlanta fiasco anyway. This is definitely a black eye for the Cascades.


By an odd coincidence I read last night on the Smithsonian website about those who "just missed" being on the Titanic.

" 'JUST MISSED IT’ CLUB FORMED WITH 6,904 MEMBERS"

"By the time Ohio’s _Lima Daily News_ weighed in, on April 26, the club seems to have grown considerably. “Up to the present time the count shows that just 118,337 people escaped death because they missed the _Titanic_ or changed their minds a moment before sailing time,” the newspaper observed."


----------



## Green Maned Lion

frequentflyer said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> 
> Latest (12/20 morning) from NTSB says that no brake application was initiated at the approach to the curve. The first brake application happened automatically. So everyone is pretty puzzled about why.
> 
> 
> 
> Looking more and more like situational awareness. "Where am I?"
Click to expand...

Situational awareness when it comes to trains means, to me, missing where you are located by a distance, which can happen, and results in things like 188 where the air is dumped too late for avoiding a derailment.

This seems to me to be something else. The air was dumped automatically, as designed by Westinghouse over 100 years ago, when the attitude of the derailing train caused one of the brake lines to disconnect, engaging a fast dump protocol. That means nobody applied the brakes.

To me this means that either the engineer was non compis mentis, or the controls werent responding. Even if he had his head turned in conversation with the conductor trainee his peripheral vision should have picked up the turn at some point and he should have slammed the ebrake button. Even Sanchez at Chatsworth, who was texting, applied the brake uselessly at the last second.

I dont knoe how the voice recorder, if there is one, works, but one would at least expect an expletive.


----------



## Adrouault

XHRTSP said:


> I was considering trying to take this train to be part of the inaugural run. My last flight on the 17th (IST-SNN-ATL) was delayed multiple times, and had I stayed on time I most likely would have gotten stuck in the Atlanta fiasco anyway. This is definitely a black eye for the Cascades.


IST-SNN-ATL?

What airline flies that?


----------



## jis

Green Maned Lion said:


> frequentflyer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jis said:
> 
> 
> 
> Latest (12/20 morning) from NTSB says that no brake application was initiated at the approach to the curve. The first brake application happened automatically. So everyone is pretty puzzled about why.
> 
> 
> 
> Looking more and more like situational awareness. "Where am I?"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Situational awareness when it comes to trains means, to me, missing where you are located by a distance, which can happen, and results in things like 188 where the air is dumped too late for avoiding a derailment.
> 
> This seems to me to be something else. The air was dumped automatically, as designed by Westinghouse over 100 years ago, when the attitude of the derailing train caused one of the brake lines to disconnect, engaging a fast dump protocol. That means nobody applied the brakes.
> 
> To me this means that either the engineer was non compis mentis, or the controls werent responding. Even if he had his head turned in conversation with the conductor trainee his peripheral vision should have picked up the turn at some point and he should have slammed the ebrake button. Even Sanchez at Chatsworth, who was texting, applied the brake uselessly at the last second.
> 
> I dont knoe how the voice recorder, if there is one, works, but one would at least expect an expletive.
Click to expand...

The lack of brake application indeed is a huge mystery. The event recorder actually records control inputs, so it is lack of control input that is the mystery. There is a chance it could be a failure of the control system. We'll just have to wait until NTSB completes its analysis.


----------



## John Bobinyec

jis said:


> Green Maned Lion said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> frequentflyer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jis said:
> 
> 
> 
> Latest (12/20 morning) from NTSB says that no brake application was initiated at the approach to the curve. The first brake application happened automatically. So everyone is pretty puzzled about why.
> 
> 
> 
> Looking more and more like situational awareness. "Where am I?"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Situational awareness when it comes to trains means, to me, missing where you are located by a distance, which can happen, and results in things like 188 where the air is dumped too late for avoiding a derailment.
> 
> This seems to me to be something else. The air was dumped automatically, as designed by Westinghouse over 100 years ago, when the attitude of the derailing train caused one of the brake lines to disconnect, engaging a fast dump protocol. That means nobody applied the brakes.
> 
> To me this means that either the engineer was non compis mentis, or the controls werent responding. Even if he had his head turned in conversation with the conductor trainee his peripheral vision should have picked up the turn at some point and he should have slammed the ebrake button. Even Sanchez at Chatsworth, who was texting, applied the brake uselessly at the last second.
> 
> I dont knoe how the voice recorder, if there is one, works, but one would at least expect an expletive.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The lack of brake application indeed is a huge mystery. The event recorder actually records control inputs, so it is lack of control input that is the mystery. There is a chance it could be a failure of the control system. We'll just have to wait until NTSB completes its analysis.
Click to expand...

I don't think it could be a failure of the *control* system. If the engineer was aware of where s/he was, and s/he tried to apply the brakes and they failed, then s/he would have known that. At that point s/he would have put the brake into emergency using the normal brake control handle. Failing that, there should have been another emergency brake valve in the cab. If that failed, s/he could have radioed the conductor to put the train into emergency from back in the train. Since the train would have needed to slow down well before the curve, an engineer who was aware of where the train was, and who was not disabled in some way, should have been able to have the brakes applied before they got to the curve.

jb


----------



## norfolkwesternhenry

AmtrakBlue said:


> norfolkwesternhenry said:
> 
> 
> 
> I would think it's the engineer as he says we are on the ground and then says we are on the highway, not sure where the conductor was in the train could have been on the cars that were on the highway, but I'm guessing it was the engineer.
> 
> Also, whoever it was, thought they were at milepost 20-21, but the detector that they went over maybe 10 seconds before the derailment, said milepost 26.4, maybe they really didn't know where they were.
> 
> Last thing before the derailment was Amtrak 501 entering centrailia north, but without any pause, says emergency emergency
> 
> *edit, they guy who said emergency emergency later said "I'll check with my conductor" which I'd think would indicate he was the engineer. Or there were two conductors, which is always a possibility.
> 
> 
> 
> There was a conductor trainee in the cab learning the route. That may have been who called it in. The engineer was pretty badly hurt (head injuries) so s/he may not have been able to call it in.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum
Click to expand...

Okay makes sense. 
Sent from my SM-G930P using Amtrak Forum mobile app


----------



## jis

John Bobinyec said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Green Maned Lion said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> frequentflyer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jis said:
> 
> 
> 
> Latest (12/20 morning) from NTSB says that no brake application was initiated at the approach to the curve. The first brake application happened automatically. So everyone is pretty puzzled about why.
> 
> 
> 
> Looking more and more like situational awareness. "Where am I?"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Situational awareness when it comes to trains means, to me, missing where you are located by a distance, which can happen, and results in things like 188 where the air is dumped too late for avoiding a derailment.
> 
> This seems to me to be something else. The air was dumped automatically, as designed by Westinghouse over 100 years ago, when the attitude of the derailing train caused one of the brake lines to disconnect, engaging a fast dump protocol. That means nobody applied the brakes.
> 
> To me this means that either the engineer was non compis mentis, or the controls werent responding. Even if he had his head turned in conversation with the conductor trainee his peripheral vision should have picked up the turn at some point and he should have slammed the ebrake button. Even Sanchez at Chatsworth, who was texting, applied the brake uselessly at the last second.
> 
> I dont knoe how the voice recorder, if there is one, works, but one would at least expect an expletive.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The lack of brake application indeed is a huge mystery. The event recorder actually records control inputs, so it is lack of control input that is the mystery. There is a chance it could be a failure of the control system. We'll just have to wait until NTSB completes its analysis.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don't think it could be a failure of the *control* system. If the engineer was aware of where s/he was, and s/he tried to apply the brakes and they failed, then s/he would have known that. At that point s/he would have put the brake into emergency using the normal brake control handle. Failing that, there should have been another emergency brake valve in the cab. If that failed, s/he could have radioed the conductor to put the train into emergency from back in the train. Since the train would have needed to slow down well before the curve, an engineer who was aware of where the train was, and who was not disabled in some way, should have been able to have the brakes applied before they got to the curve.
> 
> jb
Click to expand...

Yep. All reasonable conjectures. Now we await the facts from NTSB.


----------



## VentureForth

Adrouault said:


> XHRTSP said:
> 
> 
> 
> I was considering trying to take this train to be part of the inaugural run. My last flight on the 17th (IST-SNN-ATL) was delayed multiple times, and had I stayed on time I most likely would have gotten stuck in the Atlanta fiasco anyway. This is definitely a black eye for the Cascades.
> 
> 
> 
> IST-SNN-ATL?
> 
> What airline flies that?
Click to expand...

Turkish Air flight 6551 originates in Istanbul - Sharon - Atlanta - Chicago, though the IATA designation for Sharon, Ireland is EINN... Nice 747-400 route, which, by the way, DID arrive without a hitch in ATL on the 17th and managed to depart on the 18th to Chicago only 3 hours late.


----------



## jis

VentureForth said:


> Turkish Air flight 6551 originates in Istanbul - Sharon - Atlanta - Chicago, though the IATA designation for Sharon, Ireland is EINN...


You meant to say that the *ICAO *code for *Shannon*, Ireland is *EINN*, I suppose.

The *IATA *code is *SNN*.

But in general this is quite an odd thread to be discussing this IMHO.


----------



## SARGuy

Gents (and Ladies too, I reckon)

I'm not a train enthusiast, but I am local to this event and have been following this thread with great interest. 
A tremendous amount of data and detail, I must say.
Thank you for that.

Re: the folks who were discussing transporting engine 1402 from the scene, these pics came across this AM and I thought you might find it interesting.

Cheers,

Ron


----------



## VentureForth

jis said:


> VentureForth said:
> 
> 
> 
> Turkish Air flight 6551 originates in Istanbul - Sharon - Atlanta - Chicago, though the IATA designation for Sharon, Ireland is EINN...
> 
> 
> 
> You meant to say that the *ICAO *code for *Shannon*, Ireland is *EINN*, I suppose.
> The *IATA *code is *SNN*.
> 
> But in general this is quite an odd thread to be discussing this IMHO.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that.


----------



## VentureForth

SARGuy said:


> Gents (and Ladies too, I reckon)
> 
> I'm not a train enthusiast, but I am local to this event and have been following this thread with great interest.
> 
> A tremendous amount of data and detail, I must say.
> 
> Thank you for that.
> 
> Re: the folks who were discussing transporting engine 1402 from the scene, these pics came across this AM and I thought you might find it interesting.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Ron


I have never seen a contraption like that.


----------



## nsaspook

VentureForth said:


> SARGuy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Gents (and Ladies too, I reckon)
> 
> I'm not a train enthusiast, but I am local to this event and have been following this thread with great interest.
> 
> A tremendous amount of data and detail, I must say.
> 
> Thank you for that.
> 
> Re: the folks who were discussing transporting engine 1402 from the scene, these pics came across this AM and I thought you might find it interesting.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Ron
> 
> 
> 
> I have never seen a contraption like that.
Click to expand...

It's a superload trailer.

http://www.diamondheavyhaul.com/equipment.htm


----------



## jis

Looks like the engine frame has survived intact, which is quite remarkable.


----------



## VentureForth

Maybe a stupid question - but a moot point now anyway - why not load it onto a flat rail car? Or replace the trucks and trailer it?


----------



## railiner

Probably because the railway around it is too torn up? Don't know....

Anyway, that is some rig! 48 wheels not even counting the additional 10 on the tractor...have to, to distribute all that locomotive weight on a highway not built to handle it....


----------



## John Bobinyec

VentureForth said:


> Maybe a stupid question - but a moot point now anyway - why not load it onto a flat rail car? Or replace the trucks and trailer it?


They would've had to lift it way back up to the right of way. Easier to lift it a couple of feet onto a lowboy.

jb


----------



## Blackwolf

I find it extremely difficult to comprehend any chance of 1402 ever being repaired and placed back in service. A parts unit, at best, in the very distant future. Much like 601.

That is a considerable amount of visible damage. Not to mention 132 tons of complex machinery took Mr. Toad's Wild Ride of 25 or so vertical feet at 80 MPH through the woods and onto an interstate. There's so many things shook up in there; a Martini would only be able to relate to the experience.

All that being said, I'd say the Sprinter/Charger line has proven itself to be exceptionally safe for crew survivability when in an incident. I pray there are no further "tests" to this statement.


----------



## greatcats

For what this may be worth - a previous poster mentioned that the engine derailed at the point where the concrete ties ended and wooden ties continued. This can clearly be seen in the preceding Lowboy pictures. I was just discussing this with my former railroad co-worker friend and he said until fairly recently there was a spot like that near Dover, NJ, from where concrete ties changed to wooden, and apparently due to the lack of flexibility in the concrete ties, and changing to the wooden, a severe bump would be felt on the rather new dual purpose locomotives and the trucks would hit the ground. It was a problem that he believes was rectified. This could very well have been the case in Washington, but of course it seems that excessive speed is also a factor.


----------



## OBS

Blackwolf said:


> I find it extremely difficult to comprehend any chance of 1402 ever being repaired and placed back in service. A parts unit, at best, in the very distant future. Much like 601.
> 
> That is a considerable amount of visible damage. Not to mention 132 tons of complex machinery took Mr. Toad's Wild Ride of 25 or so vertical feet at 80 MPH through the woods and onto an interstate. There's so many things shook up in there; a Martini would only be able to relate to the experience.
> 
> All that being said, I'd say the Sprinter/Charger line has proven itself to be exceptionally safe for crew suitability when in an incident. I pray there are no further "tests" to this statement.


Nonsense, it will be repaired and back in service before New Year's.......


----------



## greatcats

OBS said:


> Blackwolf said:
> 
> 
> 
> I find it extremely difficult to comprehend any chance of 1402 ever being repaired and placed back in service. A parts unit, at best, in the very distant future. Much like 601.
> 
> That is a considerable amount of visible damage. Not to mention 132 tons of complex machinery took Mr. Toad's Wild Ride of 25 or so vertical feet at 80 MPH through the woods and onto an interstate. There's so many things shook up in there; a Martini would only be able to relate to the experience.
> 
> All that being said, I'd say the Sprinter/Charger line has proven itself to be exceptionally safe for crew suitability when in an incident. I pray there are no further "tests" to this statement.
> 
> 
> 
> Nonsense, it will be repaired and back in service before New Year's.......
> 
> Not humorous.
> 
> To clarify, it was not my comment ( greatcats ) saying the locomotive would be back in service by New Year's, which appears might be the case. I commented that the remark was not humorous and I feel that it is in poor taste.
Click to expand...


----------



## greatcats

SARGuy - Thank you for posting the pictures, which are difficult to study.


----------



## SARGuy

it might be nothing, but I saw that there is an orange box spray painted around the rail joint on the east (right?) track rail. (circled in red, lower left corner of pic.)
This is almost exactly where 1402 left the track. There appears to be a slight misalignment/height difference there, perhaps 5mm.
That wouldn't be enough to cause a derailment, would it?


----------



## Hotblack Desiato

greatcats said:


> For what this may be worth - a previous poster mentioned that the engine derailed at the point where the concrete ties ended and wooden ties continued. This can clearly be seen in the preceding Lowboy pictures. I was just discussing this with my former railroad co-worker friend and he said until fairly recently there was a spot like that near Dover, NJ, from where concrete ties changed to wooden, and apparently due to the lack of flexibility in the concrete ties, and changing to the wooden, a severe bump would be felt on the rather new dual purpose locomotives and the trucks would hit the ground. It was a problem that he believes was rectified. This could very well have been the case in Washington, but of course it seems that excessive speed is also a factor.


I don't think that's the case. Look at the image in post 263. You can see the concrete ties end well before the point where the train actually left the rails.


----------



## greatcats

Hotblack - perhaps your point may have validity, although i tend to see the point made by my co-worker. There are various ifs ands and buts here, and none of us should try to be the investigators.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Blackwolf said:


> Much like 601.


I believe 601 is still “under wraps’ for litigation purposes. I don’t think it’s been scrapped yet - if it will be scrapped.


Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## Blackwolf

AmtrakBlue said:


> Blackwolf said:
> 
> 
> 
> Much like 601.
> 
> 
> 
> I believe 601 is still “under wraps’ for litigation purposes. I don’t think it’s been scrapped yet - if it will be scrapped.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum
Click to expand...

That's my point.


----------



## frequentflyer

SARGuy said:


> it might be nothing, but I saw that there is an orange box spray painted around the rail joint on the east (right?) track rail. (circled in red, lower left corner of pic.)
> 
> This is almost exactly where 1402 left the track. There appears to be a slight misalignment/height difference there, perhaps 5mm.
> 
> That wouldn't be enough to cause a derailment, would it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tracks.JPG


How can this train leave the tracks like that and there not be much damage to the rails?


----------



## KmH

SARGuy said:


> This is almost exactly where 1402 left the track.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tracks.JPG


What official (and where), in their official capacity, has said that is about where 1402 left the tracks?


----------



## SARGuy

Just because it's not been officially stated to the media doesn't mean that "officials" aren't saying it.
I'm sure you didn't mean to come across as aggressive as you did.


----------



## Green Maned Lion

SARGuy said:


> it might be nothing, but I saw that there is an orange box spray painted around the rail joint on the east (right?) track rail. (circled in red, lower left corner of pic.)
> 
> This is almost exactly where 1402 left the track. There appears to be a slight misalignment/height difference there, perhaps 5mm.
> 
> That wouldn't be enough to cause a derailment, would it?





Hotblack Desiato said:


> I don't think that's the case. Look at the image in post 263. You can see the concrete ties end well before the point where the train actually left the rails.


Speculative uninformed theory: Engineer is somehow incapacitated; the train continues at 80mph in a 30 mph zone. Train then hits bump at the switch between concrete and wooden ties. Already destabilized, the train hits a slight vertical kink in the rail- a bump under normal circumstances, but the final blow to an already destabilized and very overspeed train. These factors combine to vertically move the fast moving locomotive just enough that it leaves the rails without much lateral force, or tearing up the tracks as it leaves.

Any if ANYONE runs with this as anything other than random speculation, I will have you FLAYED.


----------



## SARGuy

::::::::WILD SPECULATION FOLLOWS::::::::
Like I said, I'm not a train guy, but it seems that if at the join between the concrete ties and the wooden ties, becomes.... I don't know...."unweighted" and then hit an irregularity in the rail, would that be enough?
the flange on the inside of the wheel is pretty deep, no? 5" maybe? That'd be a big bounce.


----------



## john small berries

Now we're really into the "What if Superman had landed in **** Germany" phase of the uninformed crash postmortem on the boards (not just this one).

Until we actually hear something from someone who actually knows something, Occam's Razor is the best explanation.


----------



## niemi24s

SARGuy said:


> There appears to be a slight misalignment/height difference there, perhaps 5mm.


Please tell us how you were able to say this.


----------



## TrackWalker

niemi24s said:


> SARGuy said:
> 
> 
> 
> There appears to be a slight misalignment/height difference there, perhaps 5mm.
> 
> 
> 
> Please tell us how you were able to say this.
Click to expand...

I noticed it too, in one of the many photographs of the derailment.

Orange paint typically marks the POD (Point of Derailment) where a train left the rail.

Past the POD the track is lined inward for a short distance. (straight railed look, churned ballast on the low side) Most likely where the cars derailing to the inside of the curve pushed it inward as they bounced against it and then over it.


----------



## SARGuy

A colleague who was on the scene showed me a camera phone picture.

Does that work for you?


----------



## niemi24s

SARGuy said:


> A colleague who was on the scene showed me a camera phone picture.
> 
> Does that work for you?


It certainly does - thanks. From what you had written previously, it sounded as if you had somehow seen the 5mm in the photo you had posted.

Just trying to separate fact from speculation and opinion.


----------



## SARGuy

Good lord no....50 year-old eyes.

FWIW, I couldn't tell form the pic if there was much lateral movement at that joint, just the vertical.


----------



## John Bobinyec

*Cause or Effect*

The problem with looking at track damage/deformation at a derailment site is to decide whether it was there before or after the derailment. Only experts like the NTSB, FRA, etc..., can figure that out.

jb


----------



## Green Maned Lion

What makes you think they can?


----------



## lo2e

Green Maned Lion said:


> What makes you think they can?


I'm not JB, but there _might_ be evidence that would reveal whether or not there was damage prior to the accident. I don't have any idea what that evidence might be, but chances are FRA/Amtrak/NTSB/etc. are more likely to see it than I would if it's there.


----------



## pennyk

Third victim identified: Benjamin Gran

http://www.seattlepi.com/seattlenews/article/Amtrak-Crash-Seattle-3rd-Victim-12445593.php


----------



## AmtrakBlue

pennyk said:


> Third victim identified: Benjamin Gran
> 
> http://www.seattlepi.com/seattlenews/article/Amtrak-Crash-Seattle-3rd-Victim-12445593.php


Why did that article have to go on and on about his past conviction.






Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## BobWeaver

Adrouault said:


> XHRTSP said:
> 
> 
> 
> I was considering trying to take this train to be part of the inaugural run. My last flight on the 17th (IST-SNN-ATL) was delayed multiple times, and had I stayed on time I most likely would have gotten stuck in the Atlanta fiasco anyway. This is definitely a black eye for the Cascades.
> 
> 
> 
> IST-SNN-ATL?
> 
> What airline flies that?
Click to expand...

None, at least nonstop.


----------



## Green Maned Lion

AmtrakBlue said:


> pennyk said:
> 
> 
> 
> Third victim identified: Benjamin Gran
> 
> http://www.seattlepi.com/seattlenews/article/Amtrak-Crash-Seattle-3rd-Victim-12445593.php
> 
> 
> 
> Why did that article have to go on and on about his past conviction.
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum
Click to expand...

Becuse pwople who do anything at all wrong in life- esp. those who fart- deserve no quarter,


----------



## crescent-zephyr

AmtrakBlue said:


> pennyk said:
> 
> 
> 
> Third victim identified: Benjamin Gran
> 
> http://www.seattlepi.com/seattlenews/article/Amtrak-Crash-Seattle-3rd-Victim-12445593.php
> 
> 
> 
> Why did that article have to go on and on about his past conviction.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum
Click to expand...

Agreed. Seems unnecessay.

It's also quite sad, and hits very close to home, that the 3 confirmed dead were train / Amtrak enthusiasts.


----------



## Rover

jis said:


> Remember there was a Conductor in the cab on a qualifying run. So there were two people in the cab, the Engineer and the Conductor on a qualifying run. The Conductor on duty on the train was of course in the body of the train, not in the engine.


And so goes the clamoring for having two people in the cab to prevent accidents...





*Amtrak will pay derailment costs, governor says*

http://www.thenewstribune.com/latest-news/article190939969.html

Gov. Jay Inslee released a statement Wednesday confirming that Amtrak has agreed to pay derailment costs following Monday’s tragic event in DuPont that killed three passengers.

“The swift response to this tragedy has been the result of cooperation from all the involved jurisdictions,” Inslee said in the release. “The priority has been on taking care of those on board the train and restoring access to I-5 as soon as safely possible.

“This response, however, does not come without financial costs.”

Inslee spoke with Amtrak president and co-CEO Richard Anderson about the matter Wednesday.


----------



## Rover

nsaspook said:


> VentureForth said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SARGuy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Gents (and Ladies too, I reckon)
> 
> I'm not a train enthusiast, but I am local to this event and have been following this thread with great interest.
> 
> A tremendous amount of data and detail, I must say.
> 
> Thank you for that.
> 
> Re: the folks who were discussing transporting engine 1402 from the scene, these pics came across this AM and I thought you might find it interesting.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Ron
> 
> 
> 
> I have never seen a contraption like that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's a superload trailer.
> 
> http://www.diamondheavyhaul.com/equipment.htm
Click to expand...

I saw something like that once moving a giant generator to some kind of a mining site. It was 3am in the morning, and the utility company was taking down the traffic light cables across the roadway, because the generator was so tall.


----------



## west point

Since BNSF dispatches this spur did they also design and build the signal system under sub contract ?


----------



## XHRTSP

Adrouault said:


> XHRTSP said:
> 
> 
> 
> I was considering trying to take this train to be part of the inaugural run. My last flight on the 17th (IST-SNN-ATL) was delayed multiple times, and had I stayed on time I most likely would have gotten stuck in the Atlanta fiasco anyway. This is definitely a black eye for the Cascades.
> 
> 
> 
> IST-SNN-ATL?
> 
> What airline flies that?
Click to expand...

My airline does every few days on behalf of Turkish Cargo.


----------



## daybeers

Here is the latest post of Washington State Patrol's blog, and a short quote from it: https://wspinsideout.wordpress.com/2017/12/20/our-thanks-to-you/



> I think everyone can agree it has been a long couple of days. Just a little more than 50 hours after an Amtrak passenger train derailed in DuPont, Interstate 5 has reopened for public use.
> 
> As of this afternoon, December 20, 2017, the two left lanes are open, with a set reduced speed of 45 mph. All three lanes are expected to be open by tomorrow morning.


----------



## aewanabe

XHRTSP said:


> Adrouault said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> XHRTSP said:
> 
> 
> 
> I was considering trying to take this train to be part of the inaugural run. My last flight on the 17th (IST-SNN-ATL) was delayed multiple times, and had I stayed on time I most likely would have gotten stuck in the Atlanta fiasco anyway. This is definitely a black eye for the Cascades.
> 
> 
> 
> IST-SNN-ATL?
> 
> What airline flies that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> My airline does every few days on behalf of Turkish Cargo.
Click to expand...

Atlas/Kalitta? (Jetblue here)

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## junebug

After slamming Amtrak regarding life saving safety device, a little blurb at the end of the article finally acknowledges that funding has been cut. 

"Joseph Boardman, a former chief executive of Amtrak, said the company could have had the system in place throughout the corridor more than 15 years ago if Congress had not kept cutting the railroad’s funding. “It’s the same problem that you see everywhere with the infrastructure funding — not enough being available to do the job,” he said."

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/20/us/amtrak-train-safety.html?_r=0


----------



## Green Maned Lion

That goes without saying. We demand the world, fund a marble, cut taxes, and then seem shocked that the result is things don’t work right. We have this basic expectation that we can have all of it for nothing. *shrugs*


----------



## SP&S

Green Maned Lion said:


> That goes without saying. We demand the world, fund a marble, cut taxes, and then seem shocked that the result is things don’t work right. We have this basic expectation that we can have all of it for nothing. *shrugs*


Ah yes, "My taxes are too high! Cut taxes! My taxes are too high! When is somebody going to fix these potholes?" If you want it, you have to pay for it.


----------



## LookingGlassTie

It's sad that so many people have appointed themselves judge, jury and executioner where the engineer is concerned. It's pretty much a case of "people were hurt/killed, and somebody has to answer for it".


----------



## Bierboy

LookingGlassTie said:


> It's sad that so many people have appointed themselves judge, jury and executioner where the engineer is concerned. It's pretty much a case of "people were hurt/killed, and somebody has to answer for it".


I've been following this thread closely since the first post, and, if you are referring to folks here at AU, I believe you are wrong. If you are leveling accusations at the news media, then, perhaps, you are correct. However, I have been closely following this on multiple media outlets, and, while there have been factual errors in the past 48+ hours, I don't believe the engineer has been treated unfairly. YMMV...

This opinion piece in the Seattle Times today was a good example.


----------



## LookingGlassTie

@Bierboy

No, I wasn't referring to anyone here at AU. In fact, I've noticed that the discussion here has been relatively calm.

I am a member of several Amtrak groups on Facebook, and posts dealing with the Washington derailment have gotten rather heated. To the point where the admin of one of the groups has decided that there will be a single post for the incident and that all members of that group should comment to it only. All other posts will be deleted.

What prompted my post on this thread was a comment on one of those group pages. The commenter basically "hopes" that the engineer will be tried for negligent homicide. If the official investigation lends itself to that, that's one thing. But let's wait and see how it turns out before calling for people's heads.


----------



## Green Maned Lion

There are two basic possibilities: 1) the engineer aimed to activate the controls, or 2) the controls failed.

Whether the engineer is willfully negligent, grossly negligent, or responsible involuntarily, even with failed controls, there was about 40 seconds between the moment the engineer should have known something was wrong and the train derailing. So I would say it would be very difficult to explain a situation of no engineer fault.


----------



## LookingGlassTie

@GML,

Understood, that makes sense


----------



## crescent-zephyr

The big question is / will be... how much training did the engineer receive on the new route.

I know that engineers and Conductors get qualified on a route, but this crew would have been working the Portland to Seattle route already. When a new portion of a route gets added... how much training is required before they are good to go? I have no idea what the protocol is for that.

I know they have been "Testing" on the new line for a while.. but is that the crews? or more for the equipment?


----------



## Ziv

I love train travel but know little of the engineering or technology that goes into how it is done safely. So that is the caveat. But to have the tragedy in Philadelphia two years ago and then to see what are basic similarities, at least to a tyro, in Tacoma, it just makes you go "What the he** happened?!" But I guess looking at the wreck in Santiago de Compostela shows that even a modern European system can fail sometimes. I just hope we don't have another accident like this for a long time.

On edit: I did not know about the lack of PTC in SdC. I assumed that they had it. Thanks for the info, Jis.


----------



## Steve4031

The situational awareness is much more difficult when it’s dark out. I once observed a conductor or AC conductor questioning himself if we had met a certain train. I saw the lights in the window of the other train and told him discretely.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## jis

crescent-zephyr said:


> The big question is / will be... how much training did the engineer receive on the new route.
> 
> I know that engineers and Conductors get qualified on a route, but this crew would have been working the Portland to Seattle route already. When a new portion of a route gets added... how much training is required before they are good to go? I have no idea what the protocol is for that.
> 
> I know they have been "Testing" on the new line for a while.. but is that the crews? or more for the equipment?


The crew has to qualify for any modified route as if it was a new route that they were qualifying for. So the training for the new route is exactly as much as it was for the old route.

Now that is the way it should be. There are some serious questions about how the qualification was actually carried out in this case, and that is subject of the NTSB investigation too. It is possible that not much training and qualification happened at the higher speed. So we'll see.

See this article for some background:

http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/local/article190928224.html



Ziv said:


> I love train travel but know little of the engineering or technology that goes into how it is done safely. So that is the caveat. But to have the tragedy in Philadelphia two years ago and then to see what are basic similarities, at least to a tyro, in Tacoma, it just makes you go "What the he** happened?!" But I guess looking at the wreck in Santiago de Compostela shows that even a modern European system can fail sometimes. I just hope we don't have another accident like this for a long time.


Santiago de Composta was also caused by a situational awareness issue. The Operator there thought that the train was protected by an automated system, when actually it was not. At Santiago de Composta the train had just come off a high speed line with full protection onto a non-HSR line where such protection and speed control had not yet been switched on, though as I recall they were planned to be switched on at some point in the future. Strictly speaking nothing had failed technically!

There are complex human factors issue in using automation wherein a human being may become complacent knowing that even if they make a mistake they will be protected from their own mistake by the automation. There are various techniques for handling such, including penalizing the operator for the times they set of automation to stop them from doing something unsafe. But the downside to that is that often automation systems are more conservative to be safe and just the triggering does not imply that something unsafe was actually happening. So there may be more aggressive penalization than is reasonable.

The airline pilots among us here probably are quite experienced with dealing with some of these issue. There have been a few accidents where the pilot thought the automation system was in one mode providing full protection while the system had popped inadvertently into another mode, unnoticed, which provides lesser protection. Over-dependence on automation that actually change recovery behavior assuming automation is operation led to at least one disaster caused by a stall.

So, it is a really complex issue and a lot remains to be learned about the human automation interactions.


----------



## caravanman

I believe I read somewhere that in Japan, if you can sit at the front of a train, you may observe the driver/engineer/operator will point at each signal and speak out loud the signal indication. I understood this "active" style of observation kept the brain in a more alert state.

Ed.


----------



## George K

caravanman said:


> I believe I read somewhere that in Japan, if you can sit at the front of a train, you may observe the driver/engineer/operator will point at each signal and speak out loud the signal indication. I understood this "active" style of observation kept the brain in a more alert state.
> 
> Ed.


----------



## greatcats

Yes, I observed this procedure on a diesel branch line train returning to Nagoya in 2009. Perhaps worth adopting here. The engineers wear sharp uniforms, like airline pilots.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## Bierboy

George K said:


> caravanman said:
> 
> 
> 
> I believe I read somewhere that in Japan, if you can sit at the front of a train, you may observe the driver/engineer/operator will point at each signal and speak out loud the signal indication. I understood this "active" style of observation kept the brain in a more alert state.
> 
> Ed.
Click to expand...

That is fascinating...and makes so much sense. That's probably why we don't require this in the U.S. I checked out several other videos and explanations of why the Japanese rail industry requires it.


----------



## George K

Bierboy said:


> That is fascinating...and makes so much sense. That's probably why we don't require this in the U.S. I checked out several other videos and explanations of why the Japanese rail industry requires it.


Notice the presence of two personnel in the cab. I don't know if that's the case throughout Japan, of course.


----------



## Ryan

Bierboy said:


> That is fascinating...and makes so much sense. That's probably why we don't require this in the U.S. I checked out several other videos and explanations of why the Japanese rail industry requires it.


It’s done in New York:


----------



## greatcats

I only saw one engineer on the various trains I rode. The man standing in this video may be the conductor.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## railiner

Ryan said:


> Bierboy said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is fascinating...and makes so much sense. That's probably why we don't require this in the U.S. I checked out several other videos and explanations of why the Japanese rail industry requires it.
> 
> 
> 
> It’s done in New York:
Click to expand...

Great video, thanks for the link! The girl holding those signs certainly brightened the day for those conductor's performing a boring task....





BTW, for those not knowing the 'why' of that....

It is to make sure the conductor does not open the doors if the train is not at its spot....they had some incidents of conductors opening doors when trains were not entirely on the high level platform, or the wrong side of the train, sometimes resulting in passenger injuries...


----------



## neroden

If anyone's listened to a scanner, you will note that on CSX lines the engineer and conductor call out *all* signals and *all* defect detectors and *all* temporary speed restrictions as well as *all* stations. This keeps 'em awake. Unfortunately on other companies' lines they don't -- specifically they often don't call out clears, which is a *problem*. I'm not sure how much difference pointing to the signals makes when you're specifically saying 'em out loud -- it probably helps some. But if you neither point nor say it out loud, it's quite easy to get zoned out.


----------



## GiantsFan

Didn't see this posted already, sorry if its a repost.

If you're traveling in the area, this is the latest update from Amtrak

Temporary schedule:

http://www.amtrakcascades.com/sites/default/files/cascades1217-0118%20interm.pdf



> Service Disruption South of Seattle
> Until further notice, all _Cascades_ and Coast Starlight Service trains will detour between Olympia-Lacey -Tacoma, operating out of the original Tacoma Stationlocated at 1001 Puyallup Avenue, Tacoma, WA 98421. *Please note that customers traveling on this detour may experience a 10 to 15-minute delay*.
> 
> Beginning Dec. 20, *Cascades Service from Eugene to Portland, OR will be operating with substitute equipment and limited amenities*, including no food service, checked baggage service, business class or bikes. Pets will still be allowed on board. Additionally, *Trains 505 and 508, which were scheduled to operate as thru service between Eugene and Seattle, will now operate only between Seattle and Portland. New Trains 515 and 510 will be introduced on the segment between Portland and Eugene and will be a cross platform connection at Portland for passengers traveling north of Portland. *


----------



## Steve4031

neroden said:


> If anyone's listened to a scanner, you will note that on CSX lines the engineer and conductor call out *all* signals and *all* defect detectors and *all* temporary speed restrictions as well as *all* stations. This keeps 'em awake. Unfortunately on other companies' lines they don't -- specifically they often don't call out clears, which is a *problem*. I'm not sure how much difference pointing to the signals makes when you're specifically saying 'em out loud -- it probably helps some. But if you neither point nor say it out loud, it's quite easy to get zoned out.


Iirc someplace in this same forum someone used the letters csx to spell out crash, smash, explode to high light a number of recent derailments.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## neroden

CSX's derailments were due to gross failure to maintain the track. They were terrible but the cause was nothing to do with the policies for the engineers and conductors.


----------



## XHRTSP

Dumb question:

You know on the side of highways youll see those signs that display your speed and flash if youre exceeding the limit... Do railroads ever use those?


----------



## offroad437

XHRTSP said:


> Dumb question:
> 
> You know on the side of highways youll see those signs that display your speed and flash if youre exceeding the limit... Do railroads ever use those?


I have heard some defect detectors say speed but not all of them do.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## BobWeaver

aewanabe said:


> XHRTSP said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Adrouault said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> XHRTSP said:
> 
> 
> 
> I was considering trying to take this train to be part of the inaugural run. My last flight on the 17th (IST-SNN-ATL) was delayed multiple times, and had I stayed on time I most likely would have gotten stuck in the Atlanta fiasco anyway. This is definitely a black eye for the Cascades.
> 
> 
> 
> IST-SNN-ATL?
> 
> What airline flies that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> My airline does every few days on behalf of Turkish Cargo.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Atlas/Kalitta? (Jetblue here)
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum
Click to expand...

Kalitta on 747-400s.


----------



## Bierboy

First hand account of the 501 wreck...note, there are some political comments towards the end. Overall it is an enthralling story.

https://transitsleuth.com/2017/12/21/the-story-on-amtrak-cascades-train-501-derailment/


----------



## riderails

"First hand account" -- Fascinating. And, given everything, writer has the right to "be emotional" (referring to the so-called political comments).


----------



## railiner

XHRTSP said:


> Dumb question:
> 
> You know on the side of highways youll see those signs that display your speed and flash if youre exceeding the limit... Do railroads ever use those?


I've never seen nor heard of them being used on a railroad...

On the New York subways, they have a truly ancient "speed signal" system, that limits maximum speeds....if they are exceeded a "tripper arm" will activate the emergency brakes...


----------



## jis

If a proper PTC system is in use, typically the speed limit is displayed to the Engineer in the cab on the PTC display. In case of the NEC it is on the Cab Signal/ACSES display, both the Signal Speed and the Civil Speed limits in effect at the point, and the lower of the two is enforced by the system.


----------



## TinCan782

Bierboy said:


> First hand account of the 501 wreck...note, there are some political comments towards the end. Overall it is an enthralling story.
> 
> https://transitsleuth.com/2017/12/21/the-story-on-amtrak-cascades-train-501-derailment/


Thanks for posting the link...interesting to read his account.


----------



## greatcats

I appreciate the first hand story of the accident and thank you for posting. Obviously, a horrific experience, but the author is a sensible person with logical perspective.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## PRR 60

Topic title changed to show train number and specific location.


----------



## Eric S

The NTSB released a few details today (12/22/17).


Inward-facing video with audio captured the crew’s actions and their conversations. A forward-facing video with audio captured conditions in front of the locomotive as well as external sounds.
The crew was not observed to use any personal electronic devices during the timeframe reviewed.
About six seconds prior to the derailment, the engineer made a comment regarding an over speed condition.
The engineer’s actions were consistent with the application of the locomotive’s brakes just before the recording ended. It did not appear the engineer placed the brake handle in emergency-braking mode.
The recording ended as the locomotive was tilting and the crew was bracing for impact.
The final recorded speed of the locomotive was 78 mph.

More available here.


----------



## fairviewroad

*"No passenger trains will use tracks where deadly derailment occurred until safety system is activated"*

Sounds like the "old" route will be used for many months to come. It's bittersweet, of course, but people who missed out on traveling that section would appear to have the chance to do it again.

Of course, the headline refers to "no passenger trains" but the article quotes a WSDOT flack as referring to "our passenger trains." This leaves open the possibility that the Coast Starlight will use the new bypass, since that's not a WSDOT-funded train. But I suspect the Starlight will use the old route anyhow, since it would be confusing to have two separate Amtrak stations in Tacoma.

Of course, the old route doesn't have PTC either. It's interesting that WSDOT acknowledges the decision is more about public perception than it is about any actual safety concern.

Sounder trains will presumably continue to use the section from Tacoma south to Lakewood, although that doesn't specifically include the place where 501 derailed.


----------



## jis

The old route does have PTC. It is Amtrak locomotives and cab cars that don’t have on board equipment tested and deployed yet. Or so say the folks familiar with the situation there.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## fairviewroad

jis said:


> The old route does have PTC. It is Amtrak locomotives and cab cars that don’t have on board equipment tested and deployed yet. Or so say the folks familiar with the situation there.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


Thanks for the clarification.


----------



## Just-Thinking-51

Ouch

Does the new Siemens equipment have it? Installed at the factory maybe?


----------



## jis

Just-Thinking-51 said:


> Ouch
> 
> Does the new Siemens equipment have it? Installed at the factory maybe?


AFAIK Siemens does not install it. It is Amtrak/WSDOT that has to install the right flavor of I-ETMS that works in that area, and then test and train crew before it can be cut in.

It is not something that can just be switched on the morning after you get the engine. Even if it is installed, it has to undergo acceptance testing and all that.

This is one reason that AAF chose to have everything delivered to them directly and do all the post-manufacture installs and testing on their own property, since they have their own unique PTC system to test and certify against. It was interesting chatting with the certification and acceptance guy from AAF a few months back.


----------



## neroden

I sure wish the US had had the sense to go with ERTMS/ETCS like the rest of the world. Works Off The Shelf at this point (after years of development, of course)


----------



## neroden

But anyway, the preliminary NTSB investigation is starting to look like the brakes might have failed.

So sabotage has not yet been ruled out -- in particular, greased track remains a possibility. Do we know what sort of brakes the Talgos have? Do they have both disc brakes and tread brakes? (Does anyone still use track brakes which press directly against the track?)


----------



## Dutchrailnut

how does engineer not applying brakes Even on cab video translate in brake failure ?

https://www.ntsb.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/PR20171222.aspx


----------



## Green Maned Lion

that is not what the thing you linked to said.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Just saw this video on FB of some of the cars being transported away from the derailment. Not sure if it's viewable by non-FBers.

https://www.facebook.com/Pas.Darren/videos/1804156282930918/


----------



## valkyrie

NTSB: "About six seconds prior to the derailment, the engineer made a comment regarding an over speed condition."

Six seconds at 78 mph=686 ft, a little more than two football fields. Now the NTSB does not say that the brakes have or have not been applied at this point, but it seems to me that the application of brakes to reduce speed from 78 mph to below 30 would normally occur more than a couple football fields in advance of the curve. If the brakes had been applied and did not function, one would expect the engineer to quickly take action to address the brake failure such as apply emergency braking (or at least attempt to).

NTSB: "The engineer’s actions were consistent with the application of the locomotive’s brakes just before the recording ended. It did not appear the engineer placed the brake handle in emergency-braking mode."

The NTSB does not say that the engineer did not attempt to brake well in advance of the curve, but what they do say suggests that no attempt to reduce speed was made until just before the train derailed. Brake failure seems an unlikely cause if the evidence suggests that the brakes were not applied until the last second.


----------



## KmH

Love the XB-71 Valkyrie avatar image valkyrie.


----------



## Rover

The Deadly Curve Where Amtrak Train Derailed Was Deemed Too Costly to Remove

Original plans for Point Defiance railroad bypass called for elimination of tight turn

The $11 billion Washington state government plan to speed up passenger and freight rail service throughout the Pacific Northwest called for the elimination of that tight turn—a change that wasn’t included in the final design when the state eventually won federal funding for the rail bypass.

Instead, the curve where Amtrak Train 501 crashed this week was preserved to keep costs down, according to documents and state officials.

“Everybody’s always looking to straighten out the railroad,” said Grady Cothen, a consultant and former safety official at the Federal Railroad Administration, “and there are not many opportunities for that, given the reluctance to exercise eminent domain, and given the cost.”

A spokeswoman for the state Transportation Department said it is still planning to pursue future upgrades to the bypass, including at that curve, to allow higher speeds. The agency didn’t apply for funding to eliminate the curve because it wasn’t deemed necessary to support the number of round trips the state and Amtrak hoped to send through the corridor, she said.







https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-deadly-curve-where-amtrak-train-derailed-was-too-costly-to-remove-1513952658


----------



## VentureForth

So PTC is the 2008 government mandate, however, location-based overspeed prevention had been around for decades. Why was no other ATC route system in place? I understand the need for a fully comprehensive PTC system, but c'mon. Basic ATC is relatively cheap.

With the absence of PTC, was there any other cab signal/speed control available to the crew?


----------



## neroden

Private railroads have been evading installing any form of ATC since the 1940s, disgracefully. Now that PTC is required, it makes sense to just implement that.

If they'd responded sensibly to the Interstate Commerce Commission order of 1947 by installing automatic train stop back in the 1950s -- or better, if they'd voluntarily installed it when the ICC first started asking them to in the 1920s -- we wouldn't be having these discussions.


----------



## Palmland

Is ATS still active on portions of the SWC route? If so, does that negate the need there?


----------



## jis

No. PTC is way more than ATS. ATS does not enforce any speed limits, civil or signal. It just enforces signal stop., at some point, not necessarily the most desirable point all the time. You cannot avoid installing PTC because you have PTS. This is a non issue anyway because BNSF is pretty committed to getting PTC in place.

OTOH Amtrak is having a bit of a struggle equipping its engines and cab cars, testing them in the multiple different I-ETMS systems where the I stands for interoperable but is apparently aspirational, which does not save lives, by its mere presence. It actually needs to work interoperably. And then of course there is the business of training crew etc. etc.


----------



## Cho Cho Charlie

Rover said:


> The agency didn’t apply for funding to eliminate the curve because it wasn’t deemed necessary to support the number of round trips the state and Amtrak hoped to send through the corridor, she said.


Its good to read that "the agency" still thinks that saving a buck, was the best decision even after this horrific fatal accident.


----------



## CCC1007

Cho Cho Charlie said:


> Rover said:
> 
> 
> 
> The agency didn’t apply for funding to eliminate the curve because it wasn’t deemed necessary to support the number of round trips the state and Amtrak hoped to send through the corridor, she said.
> 
> 
> 
> Its good to read that "the agency" still thinks that saving a buck, was the best decision even after this horrific fatal accident.
Click to expand...

The agency mentioned is Washington Department of Transportation, acting through Sound Transit.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## Dutchrailnut

before we say the 30 mph restriction should not have been there, ask yourself how many other passenger railroads have 30 mph restrictions ??

answer is many.


----------



## MikefromCrete

Cho Cho Charlie said:


> Rover said:
> 
> 
> 
> The agency didn’t apply for funding to eliminate the curve because it wasn’t deemed necessary to support the number of round trips the state and Amtrak hoped to send through the corridor, she said.
> 
> 
> 
> Its good to read that "the agency" still thinks that saving a buck, was the best decision even after this horrific fatal accident.
Click to expand...

Straightening out the curve would have doubled the cost of the project. It also meant that the work would not meet the deadline for stimulus projects. So it was a hard choice, but not a bad one. There are very few ideal projects given the amount of money available.


----------



## jis

Reading some of the stuff here and on FB one would get the impression that some people actually believe that no railroad that is not absolutely straight should ever be or have been built, merely because an occasional Engineer has difficulty discharging his/her duties for reasons that may or may not be wholly in their control, admittedly. Frankly, they're nuts. and that is a technical term


----------



## WoodyinNYC

When the Stimulus funding for the Cascades upgrade was announced about a decade ago, the State of Washington described it as a first stage of a longer, costlier program to cut the run time Seattle-Portland to 3 hrs or even less. That long term goal would take more time and more money.

But the first phase looked good -- still looks good -- with substantial improvements for about a Billion invested. Two added roundtrips, raising the frequencies from 4 daily + the Coast Starlight to 6 daily + the Starlight, cutting at least 8 or 10 minutes out of the timetable, making a marked increase in On Time Performance, adding two new Talgo trainsets and new locomotives, a string of new or renovated stations, etc.

I can understand that with a Billion worth of planning, permitting, engineering, bidding, supervising the work, etc., Wash State DOT had its hands full with Phase One.

Then before they could pivot to even thinking, much less planning, permitting, and engineering any Phase Two, control of Congress changed, and No More Money was the new rule for passenger rail infrastructure.

Nonetheless I do remain an optimist about future funding for faster trains (including the Cascades route). After all, Vladimir Putin's Russia continues to invest heavily in rail, and sets a good example for this country to follow.


----------



## Green Maned Lion

Im not sure I agree with you, JIS. There are all kinds of circumstances, but perhaps the wisdom of creating a purposefully high speed bypass and ending it with a sharp 30 mph curve with a cliff style drop off after a downhill straight is a bit dumber than your average 30 mph curve.


----------



## west point

80 to 30 MPH track ? These large speed reductions seem to be an invitation to disaster without extra precautions. MNRR, 188, 1st wreck at Frankford, and now this wreck. Curves always have a posted safe speed. As well there is a tipping speed. What should be done if the lead speed is higher than a tipping speed ? Any thought if that needs extra precautions ?


----------



## KmH

Thankfully we all have 20-20 hindsight.

Once PTC is active on this improved route how fast will Cascade trains be able to go?


----------



## Green Maned Lion

It will be able to go the same speed as now. It just wont be allowed to go faster than it can.


----------



## crescent-zephyr

What is the system that allows the Chief to go 90... Is that just automatic train stop? Or will it enforce the speed of a signal as well?

For instance, there are signals on the NEC that are always set for Medium, even if the next block is clear, so that trains are forced to go a slower speed through curves (the elizabethtown s curve is one of them I think).


----------



## Green Maned Lion

Several things need to be in place in order for a train to be allowed to go faster than 79 mph. This includes things such as crossing arms, the condition of the track, and signaling. I don't know if ATS or PTS was required back in the day- I would guess ATS was. But equipment, alignment, and track class also need to be up to the higher speed in addition to ATS in order to allow speeds in excess of 79.


----------



## crescent-zephyr

GML... Yes obviously the track needs to be in good condition to run above 79...

But what type of system enforces the speed of the signals and when is that required? Above 110?


----------



## jis

Santa Fe ATS just forced stop at a stop signal. It did not and does not enforce any speed limit, signal or civil. That was sufficient according to the original ICC rules for 90 or even 100mph AFAIR. The PTC regulations supersede those at the drop dead date when PTC must be in place. That date has been changed by Congress as they discovered that it is hard to enforce the installation of a non existent system in the short time they had originally proclaimed. There were other alternatives possible but they were not considered acceptable in terms of cost by the owners of the property. Meanwhile, the business about requiring archeological clearance to erect radio masts and the unavailability of required radio spectrum at many places while different departments of the government proceeded with internecine warfare with each other made it further impossible to meet deadlines.

At present, it is quite possible that several commuter lines and possibly even Amtrak, will have to cease operation on certain routes come 1st Jan, 2019 if deferments are not granted.

In short, it is still a hopeless mess.

BYW using signal speed for civil speed limit enforcement has mostly been replaced by civil speed limit enforcement by ACSES on the NEC.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## crescent-zephyr

yes... Hopeless mess sounds about right indeed.

It honestly seems odd that ATS would be required for all mainline railways... Not that it would have solved anything in this situation though.


----------



## Green Maned Lion

No, ATS is not required for all railroads- PTC is required for all passenger rail lines. It is a bit ridiculous. Actually more than ridiculous. The number of lives that would be taken if we rerouted all the rail traffic to road traffic would vastly exceed that which occurs due to the lack of PTC.

PTC is not ATS- PTC is a lot closer to autonomous operation than ATS is. ATS forces an emergency brake operation at signals, and only at signals. PTC controls the trains speed at all locations, on a continuous basis.

Unless there was a direct mechanical failure with the braking system, PTC would have prevented this.


----------



## NW cannonball

Green Maned Lion said:


> No, ATS is not required for all railroads- PTC is required for all passenger rail lines. It is a bit ridiculous. Actually more than ridiculous. The number of lives that would be taken if we rerouted all the rail traffic to road traffic would vastly exceed that which occurs due to the lack of PTC.
> 
> PTC is not ATS- PTC is a lot closer to autonomous operation than ATS is. ATS forces an emergency brake operation at signals, and only at signals. PTC controls the trains speed at all locations, on a continuous basis.
> 
> Unless there was a direct mechanical failure with the braking system, PTC would have prevented this.


I take exception to "PTC is required for all passenger rail lines." Yes, in theory, perhaps. De Jure, yes, perhaps.

In fact, Congress, has made exceptions, delays, and with the current gospel of deregulation, maybe PTC will never be a nation-wide enforced rule. Kinda Like the 1947 rule that set the passenger speed limit at "less than 80 mph, unless" -- 

Yes, highway traffic has much higher fatality rates. 

Very few in the District know or care. 

(Political comment, delete or skip) Decaying empires decay. That's what we do.


----------



## Green Maned Lion

Fine, I retract and replace: PTC is supposed to be required.

Since I cant see a place for argument in your statement. Except that I try to do the best available to me with the corruption and ineptitude being understood as constants. I can fight to improve rail; I do not have the resources to fight the darkness of humanity itself.


----------



## Steve4031

There seems to be multiples of complexity when dealing with pictures as its being done in the USA. I wonder how the proven European systems would compare? They routinely have trains that passed through more than one country with different systems. Sometimes there is an engine switch and sometimes a tgv or ICE do the same without an engine change.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## jis

The Europeans actually do it extremely painfully even today, spending a whole lot of money to test multiple systems on a small number of consists that actually provide cross border service. US could do so too, but the players, their attitudes and the rules and laws are interestingly different in the US.

In Europe even when they install a standard system like ERTMS, they still cannot be operated seamlessly across borders because some operating rules are enshrined in the laws of the country, and they are inconsistent with each other. So while they make it look seamless, it is actually anything but.


----------



## Steve4031

Thank you Jis. I knew there was a lot of work involved but not the details. In Europe you are dealing with the French and Germans. In USA you are dealing with bnsf and csx. Lol

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## George K

"Don't be too quick to blame the engineer"

http://amp.kiro7.com/news/south-sound-news/railroad-investigator-says-its-wrong-to-point-a-finger-at-train-engineer/668115816


----------



## Ryan

I think I'll continue to wait for the NTSB report before casting about for blame.


----------



## RPC

On the eastbound CZ, there's a stretch of 79mph running after the train exits Gore Canyon. Toward the end of it, all heck breaks loose on the scanner/radio: a loud tone, followed by "WARNING! 30MPH CURVE AHEAD!" This is repeated twice. Would something similar be appropriate here, at least until PTC is in place?


----------



## Karl1459

RPC said:


> On the eastbound CZ, there's a stretch of 79mph running after the train exits Gore Canyon. Toward the end of it, all heck breaks loose on the scanner/radio: a loud tone, followed by "WARNING! 30MPH CURVE AHEAD!" This is repeated twice. Would something similar be appropriate here, at least until PTC is in place?


Certainly. However with the imminent installation of PTC why spend the money?

Even a more basic rules change of enforcing a transition with say a 40 mph limit 1 mile before the curve and say a 55 mph limit 2 miles before the curve would have likely helped.

A conductor friend of mine has said that prior to the MetroLink Chatsworth crash several conductors in the Southern California area had developed a GPS sensing app for their personal cell phones which would call out signal locations and speed limits. After that crash the NTSB put the kabash on the personal cell phone use and inadvertently the app which would have improved safety.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

ok now such app despite you thinking it to be useful, what happens if phone dies, or GPS signal is obstructed and somehow the warning does not get trough ??

a self developed system may not be as fool proof as people think , and if there is doubt to it being fail safe, its probably not fail safe.


----------



## Rover

Ryan said:


> I think I'll continue to wait for the NTSB report before casting about for blame.


Yes, THIS !


----------



## west point

Expecting a tool to perform flawlessly every time is a receipt for disaster. But any tool that does not distract from job improves safety in this case..


----------



## Everydaymatters

Several posts back, someone said that in Europe, or possibly it was Japan, engineers were required to point at the signals and say out loud what the signal said. Isn't this a rule for Amtrak? I have been told that's a requirement for engineers on some of the host railroads.


----------



## Triley

Everydaymatters said:


> Several posts back, someone said that in Europe, or possibly it was Japan, engineers were required to point at the signals and say out loud what the signal said. Isn't this a rule for Amtrak? I have been told that's a requirement for engineers on some of the host railroads.


Yes, but oversimplifying it...it signal says go, go slow, or stop. It does not display the speed limit.
Sent from my SM-G955U using Amtrak Forum mobile app


----------



## jis

In most of the US the signaling system does not say anything about speed limits. People from the Northeast used to NORAC mistakenly think NORAC and its speed signals apply everywhere.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## VentureForth

Everydaymatters said:


> Several posts back, someone said that in Europe, or possibly it was Japan, engineers were required to point at the signals and say out loud what the signal said. Isn't this a rule for Amtrak? I have been told that's a requirement for engineers on some of the host railroads.


Growing up in Japan, I've seen this used in practice in varying degrees. I've seen some drivers barely lift a finger on the busiest lines, to one driver on a very rural line practically shouting every action he was taking to the bemusement of passengers. In all cases, these were heavily ATC'd corridors.

I've made the argument since Chatsworth that there should be an operations conductor in the cab in addition to the payload conductor for passenger operations. Every class 1 freight had two in the cab (working, not observing). When you add a major function such as passenger manifests, ticket management, crew supervision, etc, that should require another head.

The problem with Chatsworth - and the same goes with every commuter operation - it's that the conductor repeats the signal call of the driver without being physically capable of actually seeing the aspect.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

and problem with extra eyes in cab is freight trains crash all time , with extra eyes and at lower speeds , so were is the benefit??

extra people in cab in most cases are a distraction .


----------



## MikefromCrete

There were two people in the cab in the Cascades crash, so that didn't help anything.


----------



## VentureForth

Dutchrailnut said:


> and problem with extra eyes in cab is freight trains crash all time , with extra eyes and at lower speeds , so were is the benefit??


We should get rid of co-pilots, then? Poor argument.


MikefromCrete said:


> There were two people in the cab in the Cascades crash, so that didn't help anything.


They were observing or training, not a part of a resource management oriented crew.


----------



## jis

VentureForth said:


> Dutchrailnut said:
> 
> 
> 
> and problem with extra eyes in cab is freight trains crash all time , with extra eyes and at lower speeds , so were is the benefit??
> 
> 
> 
> We should get rid of co-pilots, then? Poor argument.
Click to expand...

Actually no. Apples and Oranges. 
The copilot is justified because if something happens to the pilot the plane cannot be brought to a safe state in the absence of the copilot. A train can be through simple devices like allerters, dead man’s handle/pedal and of course more sophisticated systems like PTC or Any flavor of ATC. In the latter situation the additional person is more of a distraction than help.

The other thing is there are Cockpit Resource Management protocols used these days to minimize distractions. Nothing of the sort exists on railroads. So even what could be done to operate more safely with two crew members is not practiced on railroads.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

just the facts Ma'am... just the facts ..

.


----------



## Thirdrail7

jis said:


> The copilot is justified because if something happens to the pilot the plane cannot be brought to a safe state in the absence of the copilot. A train can be through simple devices like allerters, dead man’s handle/pedal and of course more sophisticated systems like PTC or Any flavor of ATC. In the latter situation the additional person is more of a distraction than help.


Yes, because the deadmen have worked out so well at Spuyten Duyvil. Let's not forget how helpful the alertor was for the two crew members in the




Oh...so I guess railroad crew resource management instructions have been lifted?


----------



## jis

They just don’t appear to work as effectively as the air ones given observed accident rates. [emoji6]

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## Thirdrail7

jis said:


> They just don’t appear to work as effectively as the air ones given observed accident rates. [emoji6]
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


I wouldn't know since I'm not an airline employee but I would say that train may have a lot more distractions to deal with than an airliner. I can't remember the last time I've heard of someone hanging a dog from a bridge juuust high enough to hit the windshield of a plane as it taxis down the runway. I'm not sure how many signals planes have to look for while in the air. I'd be willing to bet they aren't looking for one every two miles while also blowing a horn, looking at for signs, speed restrictions, trespassers, things in their flight path.

I can't remember the last time a plane had to even be concerned about something like this:



I suppose it was that Concorde that hit the debris in the runway and crashed. But, as I said...I'm not an airline employee.

Perhaps you can credit the crew resource management rules for there being less incidents than there are?


----------



## jis

There is no cockpit resource management that was going to prevent the Concorde crash at CDG. That was a goofup at multiple places, cockpit not being one of them. It was more akin to a piece of metal getting lodged in a point frog derailing a train. Now a CRM related incident for example would be the Tanenerife crash of the two 747s, or even the weird incident in SFO involving an Air Canda flight trying to land on a taxiway, in which case eventually a phenomenal potential disaster was averted - pretty much by chance.

But as I said in the first place, comparing planes and trains is not terribly useful when trying to decide what number of crew is appropriate, which at least you appear to agree with at great length.

I do agree with your point that it is likely that crew resource management does reduce the number of incidents some, but my point was - and quite possibly incorrectly - that the incidents still are way more frequent than is comfortable to an outside observer.


----------



## railiner

An airline crew taking off in a crowded airspace like LaGuardia for example, does have to be on high alert......just ask Captain "Sully".....


----------



## seat38a

Reporting from aboard CS train 11. All trains have been rerouted back to the old route and using the old Tacoma station. Amfleet equipment are in PDX and are now operating the segment from Portland to Eugene. The one I saw had the Noethwest Regional branding on the side.


----------



## jis

http://thehill.com/opinion/technology/366833-the-more-we-learn-about-amtrak-derailment-the-stranger-it-gets


----------



## Green Maned Lion

Ah. Some more qualified random speculation.


----------



## Hotblack Desiato

I was waiting for the "get off my lawn, you damn kids..." line in that article.


----------



## desertflyer

Have they mentioned how long they'll be using the old Tacoma station?


----------



## jis

Probably till mid year when the bypass gets full PTC and Amtrak is able to complete training its crew on I-ETMS, allowing Amtrak trains to resume running on the bypass through the new station again.


----------



## Rover

Okay, we're into the second _year_ of this investigation.

Have the NTSB completed their interview with the crew of the 501 ?

Have _any _crew interviews been accomplished ? ?


----------



## Dutchrailnut

seems everything in this investigation is secret, compare this to Amtrak #188 or MN at Spuyten Duyvil ??

in those investigations names , and everything including color of their Jockey shorts was public in 24 hours .

What is NTSB/FRA trying to hide ?


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Rover said:


> Okay, we're into the second _year_ of this investigation.
> 
> Have the NTSB completed their interview with the crew of the 501 ?
> 
> Have _any _crew interviews been accomplished ? ?


Really? Second year? You make it sound like they’ve been investigating this for over a year. It’s only been 3 weeks. 

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Dutchrailnut said:


> seems everything in this investigation is secret, compare this to Amtrak #188 or MN at Spuyten Duyvil ??
> 
> in those investigations names , and everything including color of their Jockey shorts was public in 24 hours .
> 
> What is NTSB/FRA trying to hide ?


I hope they learned their lesson and don’t release names. In order to protect the innocent (until proven guilty).

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## A Voice

Rover said:


> Okay, we're into the second _year_ of this investigation.





AmtrakBlue said:


> Really? Second year? You make it sound like they’ve been investigating this for over a year. It’s only been 3 weeks.


Changing the last number of the year on the calendar really doesn't make the investigation go any faster. If something had happened Sunday night, would you also say 'second year'?

But by that standard, it has also been a year since any Viewliner Dining Cars were delivered. People on that thread are going to go bananas.....


----------



## Rover

A Voice said:


> Rover said:
> 
> 
> 
> Okay, we're into the second _year_ of this investigation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AmtrakBlue said:
> 
> 
> 
> Really? Second year? You make it sound like they’ve been investigating this for over a year. It’s only been 3 weeks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Changing the last number of the year on the calendar really doesn't make the investigation go any faster. If something had happened Sunday night, would you also say 'second year'?
Click to expand...

Come on... I put the word _year_ in italics.

It was tongue in cheek ... Seesh !!


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Rover said:


> A Voice said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rover said:
> 
> 
> 
> Okay, we're into the second _year_ of this investigation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AmtrakBlue said:
> 
> 
> 
> Really? Second year? You make it sound like they’ve been investigating this for over a year. It’s only been 3 weeks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Changing the last number of the year on the calendar really doesn't make the investigation go any faster. If something had happened Sunday night, would you also say 'second year'?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Come on... I put the word _year_ in italics.
> 
> It was tongue in cheek ... Seesh !!
Click to expand...

Couldn't see the italics on my phone or my computer. Maybe an emoji would have helped.


----------



## Big Green Chauvanist

But what _ABOUT _crew interviews? Surely the crew can have by now been interviewed, even if from their hospital beds (if still hospitalized). The local news outlets that I have read no longer mention anything about the injured.


----------



## KmH

And isn't that a sad commentary on the news media.


----------



## Hotblack Desiato

KmH said:


> And isn't that a sad commentary on the news media.


Not sure what you're referring to here, as you don't quote anything. But if you're responding to the comment about news outlets no longer mentioning anything about the injured, I don't really see it as a sad commentary. It really just says there is no news to report. Honestly, why would there be? Unless someone else died from their injuries beyond the known three, I don't think it's really any of the public's business how the injured were doing unless they personally decided to make it the public's business.

The last thing anyone really needs having been injured in an accident is news reporters and cameras knocking on their door (hospital or home) asking for updates.


----------



## jis

Big Green Chauvanist said:


> But what _ABOUT _crew interviews? Surely the crew can have by now been interviewed, even if from their hospital beds (if still hospitalized). The local news outlets that I have read no longer mention anything about the injured.


I don't think it is reasonable to expect the NTSB to give daily and hourly updates on what they have and have not done so far. They will let the public know when there is something worth sharing.


----------



## fairviewroad

Hotblack Desiato said:


> KmH said:
> 
> 
> 
> And isn't that a sad commentary on the news media.
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure what you're referring to here, as you don't quote anything. But if you're responding to the comment about news outlets no longer mentioning anything about the injured, I don't really see it as a sad commentary. It really just says there is no news to report. Honestly, why would there be? Unless someone else died from their injuries beyond the known three, I don't think it's really any of the public's business how the injured were doing unless they personally decided to make it the public's business.
> 
> The last thing anyone really needs having been injured in an accident is news reporters and cameras knocking on their door (hospital or home) asking for updates.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Plus, it's illegal under federal law for hospitals to give out detailed information about the status of their patients, although perhaps that's one of those pesky regulations that the current administration wants to get rid of.


----------



## jis

Considering that the law in question was put in place because of leakage of health status of Chaney or something like that, maybe they won't push for it. Afterall they would not want the private details of the state of mental health of many powerful politicians to start leaking without any legal recourse to block them.


----------



## west point

Believe HIPAA rules are by law not regulation.


----------



## fairviewroad

west point said:


> Believe HIPPA rules are by law not regulation.


You're correct. My comment was somewhat tongue-in-cheek.


----------



## zephyr17

That's HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act), not HIPPA. It is a law, including the patient privacy provisions.


----------



## George K

west point said:


> Believe HIPAA rules are by law not regulation.


I may be wrong, but I think HIPAA laws (yes, they *are* laws) apply to healthcare providers and no one else.

The press reporting (or not reporting things) is not a matter of law, but a matter of courtesy (or lack thereof).


----------



## Ryan

Where do you think that the press would be getting the information?


----------



## George K

Let the lawsuits begin:

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/conductor-passenger-injured-deadly-amtrak-crash-sue-n834501


----------



## crescent-zephyr

Odd that the conductor in the cab is suing... He should have had his timetable out and watching the mileposts and known that the curve was coming... He also should have seen the 2 speed limit signs from the cab.

Im not blaming him... But for him to sue seems a bit surprising.


----------



## Pere Flyer

George K said:


> west point said:
> 
> 
> 
> Believe HIPAA rules are by law not regulation.
> 
> 
> 
> I may be wrong, but I think HIPAA laws (yes, they *are* laws) apply to healthcare providers and no one else.
> The press reporting (or not reporting things) is not a matter of law, but a matter of courtesy (or lack thereof).
Click to expand...

I have family members who work in healthcare (chaplains, nurses, administrators), and HIPAA applies to them. HIPAA applies to all healthcare providers and personnel, such that patients and/or their guardians have sole control over how their health information is shared. It may even apply to law enforcement and government agencies, too.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## VentureForth

crescent-zephyr said:


> Odd that the conductor in the cab is suing... He should have had his timetable out and watching the mileposts and known that the curve was coming... He also should have seen the 2 speed limit signs from the cab.
> 
> Im not blaming him... But for him to sue seems a bit surprising.


After all, he was familiarizing himself with the route, right? Not clear from the article, but he seemed to be a conductor in training as opposed to a functional conductor. In other words, he wasn't in the cab with the duties of having operational control of the train.


----------



## crescent-zephyr

The article makes it sound like he was a qualified conductor who was riding along specifically to familiarize himself with the new route. If that were the case, I would expect him to be extra observant and following along to his timetable.


----------



## AmtrakBlue

crescent-zephyr said:


> Odd that the conductor in the cab is suing... He should have had his timetable out and watching the mileposts and known that the curve was coming... He also should have seen the 2 speed limit signs from the cab.
> 
> Im not blaming him... But for him to sue seems a bit surprising.


Maybe he's suing because of the supposedly bad job of how the training of the crews, including the engineer he was riding with, occurred. If it's true that they did the training only at night and with multiple people in the cab - or worse, in the engine in the back, then that could be his reason for suing.


----------



## jis

Another relatively content free blather emanating from the press, as usual illustrating mostly the terrific lack of understanding of many things, including PTC

http://www.heraldnet.com/opinion/editorial-amtrak-derailment-a-train-wreck-of-factors/

Specifically, nowhere does the PTC regulation say that it must use GPS. The I-ETMS implementation does. Amtrak's ACSES for example, does not.


----------



## OBS

crescent-zephyr said:


> Odd that the conductor in the cab is suing... He should have had his timetable out and watching the mileposts and known that the curve was coming... He also should have seen the 2 speed limit signs from the cab.
> 
> Im not blaming him... But for him to sue seems a bit surprising.


Actually, it is not odd at all. Amtrak employees are not covered by a standard worker's Compensation system. Since he was injured he can either take his chances and wait to see what the Amtrak claims dept. might "offer" him in compensation for his injuries, or he can grab a lawyer and sue. There is a reason Amtrak employees call being injured "winning the Amtrak lottery"......


----------



## Bob Dylan

Seriously, Amtraks Unions need to get their heads out of their keisters and ensure that all OBS and T&E Crews are covered in case of on the Job Injuries in the the next contracts!


----------



## OBS

Bob Dylan said:


> Seriously, Amtraks Unions need to get their heads out of their keisters and ensure that all OBS and T&E Crews are covered in case of on the Job Injuries in the the next contracts!


It is an old federal law...I want to say FELA?...All the unions have lists of "railroad" lawyers that are familiar with the law and dealing with the railroads. It is the same for freight....


----------



## railiner

http://www.yjblaw.com/aops/railroad-injury/ 

This is one of those law firms that specialize in this practice, and their brief explanation of it....

One advantage of these firms, is that some have an agreement with some of the unions to only take a quarter, rather than a third of settlements as their contingency fee....


----------



## Thirdrail7

VentureForth said:


> crescent-zephyr said:
> 
> 
> 
> Odd that the conductor in the cab is suing... He should have had his timetable out and watching the mileposts and known that the curve was coming... He also should have seen the 2 speed limit signs from the cab.
> 
> Im not blaming him... But for him to sue seems a bit surprising.
> 
> 
> 
> After all, he was familiarizing himself with the route, right? Not clear from the article, but he seemed to be a conductor in training as opposed to a functional conductor. In other words, he wasn't in the cab with the duties of having operational control of the train.
Click to expand...

Correct. He wasn't qualified on the territory. he was in the process of qualifying the territory. It is the equivalent of me putting you on the head end Crescent-Zephyr and expecting you to keep a sharp watch. You are unfamiliar so you're not going to be particularly helpful.



OBS said:


> Bob Dylan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Seriously, Amtraks Unions need to get their heads out of their keisters and ensure that all OBS and T&E Crews are covered in case of on the Job Injuries in the the next contracts!
> 
> 
> 
> It is an old federal law...I want to say FELA?...All the unions have lists of "railroad" lawyers that are familiar with the law and dealing with the railroads. It is the same for freight....
Click to expand...

Indeed, and I'm sure the companies wouldn't embrace Bob Dylan's idea to provide workman's comp, disability coverage. Hell, there are plenty of departments that don't have any sort of sick time/benefits.


----------



## greatcats

The qualifying conductor would have been on the clock, being paid for his time. So this was certainly an on duty injury. We have heard very little about the engineer, unlike the Philadelphia wreck where he was all over the news. The circumstances of the qualifying procedures have sounded pretty suspect to me. Having worked with train and engine crews back east, I feel terrible for that man.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## VentureForth

Preliminary Report: https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Pages/RRD18MR001-prelim.aspx

Interestingly, they haven't been able to interview the conductor or engineer in the cab because of their injuries, yet the conductor was able to file a lawsuit against the engineer? Or was the conductor who filed the suit the one in the train?


----------



## Dutchrailnut

What I find more disturbing is the Conductor has not yet made statements to NTSB due to his injuries !!

yet he has talked to his lawyer and made statements to be able to file a lawsuit ?????

something is wrong here.


----------



## dlagrua

Regardless, three lives were lost,there were numerous injuries and millions of dollars of equipment was destroyed. Someone was negligent and must take responsibility for it. There were signs clearly showing the speed limit and if those in the cab lost track of that (or get distracted) they should have slowed down to establish and understand their position.


----------



## Ryan

dlagrua said:


> Someone was negligent and must take responsibility for it.


False. Sometimes, bad things just happen. We'll have to follow the data to see if this is one of those cases or not.


----------



## Blackwolf

Ryan said:


> dlagrua said:
> 
> 
> 
> Someone was negligent and must take responsibility for it.
> 
> 
> 
> False. Sometimes, bad things just happen. We'll have to follow the data to see if this is one of those cases or not.
Click to expand...

Agreed. The whole Witch Hunt fixation in the United States with every bad thing that happens is a severe cultural flaw.


----------



## Green Maned Lion

Ryan said:


> dlagrua said:
> 
> 
> 
> Someone was negligent and must take responsibility for it.
> 
> 
> 
> False. Sometimes, bad things just happen. We'll have to follow the data to see if this is one of those cases or not.
Click to expand...

Moreso, this could also be the result of a variety of different negligent actions by more than one person, resulting in no one person being responsible. Which frankly is almost always the case.


----------



## west point

NTSB has often listed a chain of events that if any one had not occurred then accident would not have happened. Prime example was EAL accident into the everglades with a nine event chain.


----------



## Thirdrail7

I think they are working on a flow chart to ascertain what happened. This is rough draft:


----------



## Ryan

That's not a flow chart, this is a flow chart.


----------



## jis

The flowchart should really focus on understanding what happened, rather than focusing on fault assignment


----------



## Thirdrail7

Ryan said:


> That's not a flow chart, this is a flow chart.


----------



## Seaboard92

Ryan said:


> That's not a flow chart, this is a flow chart.


I think that explains a lot of the mechanical crews I've worked with.


----------



## Seaboard92

Ryan said:


> That's not a flow chart, this is a flow chart.


I think that explains a lot of the mechanical crews I've worked with.


----------



## Green Maned Lion

Actually I think that is the decision making flowchart for most American corporations.


----------



## Dan O

May be other mitigating factors but going 78-80 mph in a 30 mph zone is hard to overlook. Seems like engineer/conductor will bear some of the blame.


----------



## Acela150

dlagrua said:


> Someone was negligent and must take responsibility for it.


I have stayed out of this topic for many reasons. And Dennis' comment is the top reason along with the endless speculation of why it happened.

Dennis I'm directing this at you. You are not a member of the NTSB. Until you are, don't go pointing fingers. You don't know a single thing about what was happening in that cab, or anything relating to the condition of the train. And guess what.. No one else here does. Unless you were in the cab at the stick of the train, zip it. You have a history of saying stupid ****. And you never learn from it. As of late I've been trying to keep my nose clean on AU. But this is one where someone says something stupid and I can't let it go.

Yes. The train had an overspeed condition. Could this have been prevented. I'll let the NTSB decide that. Should have PTC been installed on the route. Yes. Why it wasn't, I'll never understand.


----------



## NW cannonball

Acela150 said:


> dlagrua said:
> 
> 
> 
> Someone was negligent and must take responsibility for it.
> 
> 
> 
> I have stayed out of this topic for many reasons. And Dennis' comment is the top reason along with the endless speculation of why it happened.
> 
> Dennis I'm directing this at you. You are not a member of the NTSB. Until you are, don't go pointing fingers. You don't know a single thing about what was happening in that cab, or anything relating to the condition of the train. And guess what.. No one else here does. Unless you were in the cab at the stick of the train, zip it. You have a history of saying stupid ****. And you never learn from it. As of late I've been trying to keep my nose clean on AU. But this is one where someone says something stupid and I can't let it go.
> 
> Yes. The train had an overspeed condition. Could this have been prevented. I'll let the NTSB decide that. Should have PTC been installed on the route. Yes. Why it wasn't, I'll never understand.
Click to expand...

Totally agree


----------



## PerRock

Acela150 said:


> Should have PTC been installed on the route. Yes. Why it wasn't, I'll never understand.


Actually PTC was installed on that route, it just wasn't turned on. Sound Transit stated that they were having some difficulties with it.

Now why they went ahead and ran the service without it on.....

peter


----------



## jis

Even if it was turned on it would not have made a difference, since Amtrak equipment is not setup to use PTC on that route yet. Amtrak does not use active PTC on the rest of the route either. PTC is used by freight trains on the BNSF route.


----------



## KmH

Everyone here that has read the NTSB's 1/4/18 prliminary report linked to in post #478 know _some_ about what happened in the cab, the train speed, the weather conditions and some other details.


----------



## Green Maned Lion

Actually, everything I read Inc that report creates more questions, and besides knowing that the engineer was upright at impact, answers none.


----------



## TinCan782

KmH said:


> Everyone here that has read the NTSB's 1/4/18 prliminary report linked to in post #476 know _some_ about what happened in the cab, the train speed, the weather conditions and some other details.


I see the link within post #47*8*


----------



## KmH

Thanks. Changed it.


----------



## west point

Some clarify/ Is the PTC on the Lakewood spur being constructed and certified by BNSF not Sound transit ?


----------



## daybeers

Has anyone else read this letter from Richard Anderson to Departments of Transportation of both Washington and Oregon? It is dated January 8th, but I only found the link in an article written yesterday in Progressive Railroading. The letter makes some pretty substantial claims: PTC in all diesels by September, up from a claimed 51% now? I would be frankly very surprised and happy if this actually happens.


----------



## Green Maned Lion

I honestly have high hopes for Anderson. He is the ideal fit for a company that MacGuyvers everything.


----------



## Thirdrail7

daybeers said:


> Has anyone else read this letter from Richard Anderson to Departments of Transportation of both Washington and Oregon? It is dated January 8th, but I only found the link in an article written yesterday in Progressive Railroading. The letter makes some pretty substantial claims: PTC in all diesels by September, up from a claimed 51% now? I would be frankly very surprised and happy if this actually happens.


It's possible. The Chargers are being deployed which frees up engines. Additionally, they are doing the winter cuts thing so that can free up diesels as well. Finally, there isn't as much private car action in the winter. This is the perfect time for a blitz.


----------



## tp49

Per this article from the Seattle Times (with fair use quote below) the engineer was interviewed by the NTSB within the last week. Just putting the article out there, you can draw your own conclusions.



> The engineer on the Amtrak train that derailed south of Tacoma last month, killing three people and injuring dozens, said he didn’t see or didn’t recognize the signposts and signals indicating a drastic drop in the speed limit, a new report from federal investigators says.
> 
> It was the engineer’s second time driving a train in that direction on a newly opened stretch of track, known as the Point Defiance Bypass.


----------



## frequentflyer

tp49 said:


> Per this article from the Seattle Times (with fair use quote below) the engineer was interviewed by the NTSB within the last week. Just putting the article out there, you can draw your own conclusions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The engineer on the Amtrak train that derailed south of Tacoma last month, killing three people and injuring dozens, said he didn’t see or didn’t recognize the signposts and signals indicating a drastic drop in the speed limit, a new report from federal investigators says.
> 
> It was the engineer’s second time driving a train in that direction on a newly opened stretch of track, known as the Point Defiance Bypass.
Click to expand...

So 26 pages of posts to confirm what we all suspected, a perfectly functioning train was going to fast for the curve because the engineer did not slow down. Sad, maybe PTC will prevent these sort of derailments in the future.

In a way I feel bad for the engineer, I would hate to have the dreams he is having as he re plays those few seconds in his mind over and over.


----------



## Acela150

frequentflyer said:


> tp49 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Per this article from the Seattle Times (with fair use quote below) the engineer was interviewed by the NTSB within the last week. Just putting the article out there, you can draw your own conclusions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The engineer on the Amtrak train that derailed south of Tacoma last month, killing three people and injuring dozens, said he didn’t see or didn’t recognize the signposts and signals indicating a drastic drop in the speed limit, a new report from federal investigators says.
> 
> It was the engineer’s second time driving a train in that direction on a newly opened stretch of track, known as the Point Defiance Bypass.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In a way I feel bad for the engineer, I would hate to have the dreams he is having as he re plays those few seconds in his mind over and over.
Click to expand...

I agree with you. I feel the same way about Brandon Bostian the engineer in 188.

But the one thing I give him credit for, is admitting his faults. As someone who was raised to be honest and is honest.. It takes guts to say that. Kudos to that engineer for telling the truth.






Acela150 is now staying out of this topic out of respect for a fellow AU member as well as Jim and Zach.


----------



## Rover

frequentflyer said:


> tp49 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Per this article from the Seattle Times (with fair use quote below) the engineer was interviewed by the NTSB within the last week. Just putting the article out there, you can draw your own conclusions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The engineer on the Amtrak train that derailed south of Tacoma last month, killing three people and injuring dozens, said he didn’t see or didn’t recognize the signposts and signals indicating a drastic drop in the speed limit, a new report from federal investigators says.
> 
> It was the engineer’s second time driving a train in that direction on a newly opened stretch of track, known as the Point Defiance Bypass.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So 26 pages of posts to confirm what we all suspected, a perfectly functioning train was going to fast for the curve because the engineer did not slow down. Sad, maybe PTC will prevent these sort of derailments in the future.
> 
> In a way I feel bad for the engineer, I would hate to have the dreams he is having as he re plays those few seconds in his mind over and over.
Click to expand...







Better signage for such a hazardous curve situation for mandatory speed reduction would be in order.

Perhaps an led lighted sign powered by a solar panel.

Here's a link to what China can offer: https://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/Long-life-span-Slow-Down-Warning_60510749645.html

My question would be was one run through enough to train an engineer on a new section?

Tell me again, Amtrak does, or does not use video that monitors the cab?


----------



## Just-Thinking-51

One time at the stick, not one time on this route.

Remember this is a very short reroute of a longer division.

Union has a voice, they and Amtrak agree to the training on the new route.

Big signs flashing light or maybe install the PTC on the engines.


----------



## Just-Thinking-51

CNN has a in depth story.

http://www.cnn.com/2018/01/28/us/amtrak-501-derail-training-safety-investigation/index.html


----------



## ChuckL

Just-Thinking-51 said:


> CNN has a in depth story.
> 
> http://www.cnn.com/2018/01/28/us/amtrak-501-derail-training-safety-investigation/index.html


The CNN report pretty much answers the question Rover posted earlier about whether one run through a section of new trackage was enough training for an engineer. 

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum


----------



## Dutchrailnut

and again the engineer, if he felt not comfortable should have either marked off or operated at lower speed ( when in doubt take safest course)

by running at 81 mph in a 79 mph area it shows him over confident of his questionable abilities..


----------



## WoodyinNYC

Rover said:


> Better signage for such a hazardous curve situation for mandatory speed reduction would be in order.
> 
> Perhaps an led lighted sign powered by a solar panel.
> 
> Here's a link to what China can offer: https://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/Long-life-span-Slow-Down-Warning_60510749645.html


If a sign like this goes for about $72 on the Internet, maybe the cost could be covered by a crowd-funding drive? Nah, easier to write the check and sent it to Richard Anderson my damn self.


----------



## jis

It would be better to adequately train engineers and do a few obvious things to improve the safety culture, which appears to be down in the toilet at present, though, new sign or not.


----------



## VentureForth

It's pretty easy to see why Burlington put the tracks where they did. If they smoothed out the curve perfectly, there'd be a lot of earthen work and a couple of homes that would have to go away. Question is, after $800M, how much more would this have been?


----------



## Just-Thinking-51

Gentle arc over a highway would not be cheap. Easier to raise the highway over the tracks. Could use general highway funds for this. Dont forget there a 30 mph switch at the end of new and improved cut off. It was not deem important so it was not done. Written in blood.

.


----------



## keelhauled

There are thousands of restricted speed turnouts that are traversed safely every day across the country. The bridge and interlocking should have been an inefficiency, not a fatal flaw in the operation. If engineers are not being adequately trained to safely operate over their territory, then there is a more fundemental problem that cannot be solved by simply making the track straighter.


----------



## west point

30 MPH switch was all that was needed. If curve had been eased to 50 - 60 MPH then switch(s) would have been also been built for that speed..


----------



## akbrian

VentureForth said:


> It's pretty easy to see why Burlington put the tracks where they did. If they smoothed out the curve perfectly, there'd be a lot of earthen work and a couple of homes that would have to go away. Question is, after $800M, how much more would this have been?


I can't help but wonder if your sketched in proposed alignment is similar to where it was prior to the Interstate 5 replacing US Route 99 in this particular area. Just as an historical note, the Northbound I5 bridge over the Nisqually River, just a little bit south, was part of Route 99 (built in 1937). The southbound bridge wasn't built until 1967 according to bridgehunter.com.


----------



## VentureForth

Judging by the contour lines, it looks like it's always been to follow terrain. Interestingly, you can see where the Point Defiance branch that shots straight north had a very obvious berm that was constructed.


----------



## CSXfoamer1997

Devastation-wise, I wonder how the crash would've come out if one of the Talgo 8's was involved?


----------



## PRR 60

I've split the Wisconsin Talgo discussion into a new topic and pinned it. The new Talgo topic can be found HERE.


----------



## VentureForth

Has the bypass reopened?


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17

VentureForth said:


> Has the bypass reopened?


No, they are waiting on PTC.


----------



## VentureForth

I thought it was installed, but not "turned on".


----------



## Thirdrail7

Mark your calendar.

NTSB slates two-day hearing on fatal Amtrak crashes



> The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) will hold an investigative hearing July 10-11 on two recent Amtrak crashes.
> 
> The public hearing will explore issues involved in the Amtrak Cascades derailment in DuPont, Washington, on Dec. 18, 2017; and an Amtrak collision with a freight train on Feb. 4 near Cayce, South Carolina, NTSB officials said in a press release.
> 
> The hearing will include testimony from the Federal Railroad Administration; the International Association of Sheet Metal, Air, Rail and Transportation Workers; the Brotherhood of Locomotives Engineers and Trainmen; the Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen; CSX; Sound Transit; Amtrak; the Washington State Department of Transportation; and the Washington State Utilities and Transportation Commission.
> 
> The hearing will be held in Washington, D.C., and may be watched live via webcast.


----------



## ParanoidAndroid

When is the bypass reopening?


----------



## RPC

ParanoidAndroid said:


> When is the bypass reopening?


Once PTC is installed and operational.


----------



## Thirdrail7

Here's a new wrinkle. Horrific': Amtrak derailment victim sues, alleging neglect

Attorney says an electrical failure was discovered before the train departed Seattle

Please allow a brief fair use quote:



> Wetzel filed a lawsuit Thursday in federal court, alleging Amtrak was negligent in sending the train on its route that morning.
> 
> His isn't the first lawsuit filed against Amtrak, but it makes a couple new claims: that Amtrak knowingly went ahead with the trip despite an electrical system failure detected the day of the crash, and that the rear locomotive was not properly electronically linked to the front, disabling its braking abilities.
> 
> "Amtrak knew that train was not fit for service that day," attorney Jim Vucinovich said, calling it a "conscious decision" to run the train despite its alleged deficiencies.'Horrific': Amtrak derailment victim sues, alleging neglect
> Other allegations have been leveled at Amtrak, involving the quality of the track, the training of the operators, the lack of the positive train control (PTC) system that could have slowed the train automatically.The train was believed to be traveling about 80 mph in a 30 mph zone. The PTC system was installed on the train, but not yet enabled.
> 
> But the revelations about the electrical failure and the rear locomotive were surfaced by a whistleblower, Vucinovich said. The lack of braking on the rear locomotive could have served to be dead weight at the back of the train and possibly contributed to the accordion effect the train cars took when they derailed.


I'm not sure this aspect will work out. Even if they aren't linked electrically, they can still run them as long as they are linked pneumatically.


----------



## Seaboard92

Thirdrail7 said:


> Here's a new wrinkle. Horrific': Amtrak derailment victim sues, alleging neglect
> 
> Attorney says an electrical failure was discovered before the train departed Seattle
> 
> Please allow a brief fair use quote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wetzel filed a lawsuit Thursday in federal court, alleging Amtrak was negligent in sending the train on its route that morning.
> 
> His isn't the first lawsuit filed against Amtrak, but it makes a couple new claims: that Amtrak knowingly went ahead with the trip despite an electrical system failure detected the day of the crash, and that the rear locomotive was not properly electronically linked to the front, disabling its braking abilities."Amtrak knew that train was not fit for service that day," attorney Jim Vucinovich said, calling it a "conscious decision" to run the train despite its alleged deficiencies.'Horrific': Amtrak derailment victim sues, alleging neglect
> 
> Other allegations have been leveled at Amtrak, involving the quality of the track, the training of the operators, the lack of the positive train control (PTC) system that could have slowed the train automatically.
> 
> The train was believed to be traveling about 80 mph in a 30 mph zone. The PTC system was installed on the train, but not yet enabled.
> 
> But the revelations about the electrical failure and the rear locomotive were surfaced by a whistleblower, Vucinovich said. The lack of braking on the rear locomotive could have served to be dead weight at the back of the train and possibly contributed to the accordion effect the train cars took when they derailed.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not sure this aspect will work out. Even if they aren't linked electrically, they can still run them as long as they are linked pneumatically.
Click to expand...

The courts will allow it because let's face it they don't understand railroading.


----------



## rspenmoll

Thirdrail7 said:


> Here's a new wrinkle. Horrific': Amtrak derailment victim sues, alleging neglect
> 
> Attorney says an electrical failure was discovered before the train departed Seattle
> 
> Please allow a brief fair use quote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wetzel filed a lawsuit Thursday in federal court, alleging Amtrak was negligent in sending the train on its route that morning.
> 
> His isn't the first lawsuit filed against Amtrak, but it makes a couple new claims: that Amtrak knowingly went ahead with the trip despite an electrical system failure detected the day of the crash, and that the rear locomotive was not properly electronically linked to the front, disabling its braking abilities.
> 
> "Amtrak knew that train was not fit for service that day," attorney Jim Vucinovich said, calling it a "conscious decision" to run the train despite its alleged deficiencies.'Horrific': Amtrak derailment victim sues, alleging neglectOther allegations have been leveled at Amtrak, involving the quality of the track, the training of the operators, the lack of the positive train control (PTC) system that could have slowed the train automatically.
> 
> The train was believed to be traveling about 80 mph in a 30 mph zone. The PTC system was installed on the train, but not yet enabled.
> 
> But the revelations about the electrical failure and the rear locomotive were surfaced by a whistleblower, Vucinovich said. The lack of braking on the rear locomotive could have served to be dead weight at the back of the train and possibly contributed to the accordion effect the train cars took when they derailed.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not sure this aspect will work out. Even if they aren't linked electrically, they can still run them as long as they are linked pneumatically.
Click to expand...

With the rear unit disabled, wouldn't only its air brakes have been operable and not the dynamic brakes? I don't think it would have made much of a difference though considering braking began only about five seconds before the derailment. As for the part about the "accordion effect", the allegation he seems to be making is that jumper cables, when connected, act to arrest the forward motion of a locomotive or railroad car in the event of a sudden deceleration, and that therefore it was negligent to operate the train without the rear unit being connected by jumper cable to the car in front of it, rather than leaving the rear unit behind at the origin station, as this contributed to the rear unit impacting the car in front of it. Is there any truth to that assertion?


----------



## Just-Thinking-51

rspenmoll said:


> With the rear unit disabled, wouldn't only its air brakes have been operable and not the dynamic brakes? I don't think it would have made much of a difference though considering braking began only about five seconds before the derailment. As for the part about the "accordion effect", the allegation he seems to be making is that jumper cables, when connected, act to arrest the forward motion of a locomotive or railroad car in the event of a sudden deceleration, and that therefore it was negligent to operate the train without the rear unit being connected by jumper cable to the car in front of it, rather than leaving the rear unit behind at the origin station, as this contributed to the rear unit impacting the car in front of it. Is there any truth to that assertion?


No.
Two sets of wires that run to and from the engine. Hotel power and multi-unit control. The MU control wires not working will in result in engine not been able to supply traction power to the train. The Hotel power wires not working means the unit can not provide the 480 volt power to the railcars. (HVAC, lights, and power to plugs)

The brakes are control by air lines. There two on most Amtrak trains. One smaller supply line, one for braking.

Now about the impacting the car in front of it. Well it a fact that a engine weights more than a railcar. Its also a fact the locomotive by themselves have worse braking distance at speed than locomotive with railcars behind it. So technically having a locomotive top and tail may of caused more damage in this event. However its a non issue for anyone other than the lawyer.

If we lived in a flood zone and I build my house higher than yours and use dirt to angle my yard up to the house. Will I cause your house more damage in a flood? Yes technically it would.

In this case your talking a few feet difference. The problem was a overspeed event and a sharp curve. The lawyer is just fishing.

.


----------



## rspenmoll

Just-Thinking-51 said:


> rspenmoll said:
> 
> 
> 
> With the rear unit disabled, wouldn't only its air brakes have been operable and not the dynamic brakes? I don't think it would have made much of a difference though considering braking began only about five seconds before the derailment. As for the part about the "accordion effect", the allegation he seems to be making is that jumper cables, when connected, act to arrest the forward motion of a locomotive or railroad car in the event of a sudden deceleration, and that therefore it was negligent to operate the train without the rear unit being connected by jumper cable to the car in front of it, rather than leaving the rear unit behind at the origin station, as this contributed to the rear unit impacting the car in front of it. Is there any truth to that assertion?
> 
> 
> 
> No.
> Two sets of wires that run to and from the engine. Hotel power and multi-unit control. The MU control wires not working will in result in engine not been able to supply traction power to the train. The Hotel power wires not working means the unit can not provide the 480 volt power to the railcars. (HVAC, lights, and power to plugs)
> 
> The brakes are control by air lines. There two on most Amtrak trains. One smaller supply line, one for braking.
> 
> Now about the impacting the car in front of it. Well it a fact that a engine weights more than a railcar. Its also a fact the locomotive by themselves have worse braking distance at speed than locomotive with railcars behind it. So technically having a locomotive top and tail may of caused more damage in this event. However its a non issue for anyone other than the lawyer.
> 
> If we lived in a flood zone and I build my house higher than yours and use dirt to angle my yard up to the house. Will I cause your house more damage in a flood? Yes technically it would.
> 
> In this case your talking a few feet difference. The problem was a overspeed event and a sharp curve. The lawyer is just fishing.
> 
> .
Click to expand...

Just to clarify, even the locomotive's dynamic brakes, and not just the train air brakes, are controlled by train line? Also I realize I was very verbose in my question, and I could have phrased it in a less confusing manner. I also meant to include a link that I neglected to. If you look at the actual complaint filed, which I have included a link to at the end of this post, in paragraph 3.11, plaintiff's counsel apparently alleges specifically, unless I am misinterpreting, that the fact that the jumper cable had to be disconnected from the rear unit, and not simply the rear unit's position in the consist increased the severity of the accident. What I was trying to ask is if jumper cable acts in any to arrest forward motion during a rapid deceleration event. I realize this has not been very concise, so if I am misinterpreting you or the complaint, or if we are saying the same thing and talking past each other, I apologize. https://www.scribd.com/document/381290262/Rudolf-D-Wetzel-vs-Amtrak-complaint-for-personal-injuries


----------



## jis

If the locomotive was deadheading powered off where was the dynamic braking going to come from? Would anyone complain if there were three passenger cars instead of a locomotive behind the train providing about the same amount of energy to dissipate through standard air braking?

These are cases of throw everything you can think of up onto the wall and see if anything sticks [emoji57]

This is akin to what is done in patent applications. The claims are structured more generic to specific and often there are hundreds of them in the application. The patent office usually strikes out a bunch but one is still left with a whole pile of them, some of them still patently absurd and obvious or too vague. Then if it is ever litigated, sometimes a few will be found to be invalid, but still a few will hopefully survive. Sometimes one is not so lucky and the whole things gets thrown out. That is the way these legal things work. In case of patents of course, more often than not they are used in packages to trade than to actually litigate.


----------



## Just-Thinking-51

No simple answer.

The short answer is No its irrelevant.

The long answer is Technically Yes, but still irrelevant.

Your deep in the woods. So many questions to be ask before you get to the final results, and then its going to be irrelevant to the accident.

Did the engineer apply the dynamic brakes?

Does the locomotive automatic apply the dynamic brakes when the train is stopping?

What is the set-up time for the dynamic brakes to apply?

Does the locomotive transmit the dynamic brakes order to the following unit automatic in a braking application?

What is the set-up time on a P42 dynamic brakes?

(Older technology)

So in short did the dynamic brakes get applied at all?

Then you can test and see how much the dynamic brakes would of slow the train down. Then rerun the test after the brakes have cool down with the rear unit off line. Measure the distance. Note the difference (if any). Determined the point of brake application from the derailment to the point of that the train stop. See if the dynamic brakes would have the time to apply. Then you can argue why this is important in the case to the Judge.

The attorney is fishing.


----------



## rspenmoll

Just-Thinking-51 said:


> No simple answer.
> 
> The short answer is No its irrelevant.
> 
> The long answer is Technically Yes, but still irrelevant.
> 
> Your deep in the woods. So many questions to be ask before you get to the final results, and then its going to be irrelevant to the accident.
> 
> Did the engineer apply the dynamic brakes?
> 
> Does the locomotive automatic apply the dynamic brakes when the train is stopping?
> 
> What is the set-up time for the dynamic brakes to apply?
> 
> Does the locomotive transmit the dynamic brakes order to the following unit automatic in a braking application?
> 
> What is the set-up time on a P42 dynamic brakes?
> 
> (Older technology)
> 
> So in short did the dynamic brakes get applied at all?
> 
> Then you can test and see how much the dynamic brakes would of slow the train down. Then rerun the test after the brakes have cool down with the rear unit off line. Measure the distance. Note the difference (if any). Determined the point of brake application from the derailment to the point of that the train stop. See if the dynamic brakes would have the time to apply. Then you can argue why this is important in the case to the Judge.
> 
> The attorney is fishing.


I figured as much.


----------



## TinCan782

Well, we'll see how this plays out ...

https://www.king5.com/article/news/local/engineer-in-deadly-amtrak-crash-had-no-experience-on-new-locomotive/281-571994032

MODERATOR NOTE: The topic "Engineer in deadly Amtrak crash had no experience on new locomotive" has been merged into this main thread.


----------



## railiner

While that may have contributed somewhat to the list of causes, I don't think it was a major cause. If anything, he should have been even more cautious then normal, operating a new piece of equipment, on a new route...


----------



## jis

There will be a webcast meeting hosted by NTSB on May 21, 2019, Tuesday at 1pm EDT to present the final report on the Cascades derailment on Dec 17, 2018 near DuPont WA.

https://www.ntsb.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/NR20190516.aspx

Live media coverage will be available at http://ntsb.windrosemedia.com/ starting a little before the meeting.


----------



## jis

Have been listening to the hearing. Quite interesting. They took apart the certification process for equipment, route and operating personnel. Now they are comprehensively taking apart the standard operating procedure of railroads referring to the safety practices in the aviation industry.

One thing is clear that the entire certification process for the commercial run that day was quite broken, and surprisingly, no one seemed to be in charge as the final approver of anything.


----------



## Willbridge

I've been following it, too. They're on break at the moment:
http://ntsb.windrosemedia.com/

A friend of mine was one of those killed and it was hard listening to the details of his death. From my former work I know the site.

The staff has done their work well and some of the commissioners have drawn out new points. I am particularly impressed by Commissioner Homendy. A couple of other members have the habit of using aviation terminology, which implies that they haven't as thoroughly gone through the subject matter.


----------



## jis

Yes. Commissioner Homendy has shown greater depth of understanding than some of the others.


----------



## desertflyer

Mr. Hiller from the NTSB sounds like he really doesn't like the Talgo equipment's performance in a crash. To me the fix is easy...prevent the crash. It seems like Talgos perform really well in other places they are used. Unfortunately this could be used as a reason to keep using outdated, heavy, custom, overbuilt passenger rail equipment in the United States.


----------



## jis

There is no denying that there are serious issues with Talgo 6s. Taking those out of service using some reasonable process should not cause outdated equipment to be used since the new FRA regulations allow modern equipment with minor modifications to be used. 

Talgo 8 is an entirely different story.


----------



## desertflyer

Fair enough. I think that preventing derailments in the first place should be the priority and some of the talking points seem like tangents. But I guess that should be part of any investigation.


----------



## jis

desertflyer said:


> Fair enough. I think that preventing derailments in the first place should be the priority and some of the talking points seem like tangents. But I guess that should be part of any investigation.


That is where PTC comes in. This was a poster child of a PTC preventable accident. This was mentioned at least half a dozen times if not more during the hearing.


----------



## Willbridge

The frustrating thing about the NTSB process is that they can't address the higher level problems that set up this situation, such as lack of routine orders for locomotives and cars for passenger service that would introduce updates and let older equipment be taken out of service for retrofits. Related to that is Amtrak's perennial shortage of equipment when a state comes forward to request a service. And related to that comes the idea of robbing the long-distance service to fill out regional trains (for which the Superliners were not designed).

Also not in their process is the suspicions that the FRA's concerns about European standards were akin to the Chinese tactics to protect their economy, that lack of PTC implementation may be used to kill non-NEC routes, and the traditional concern that being in the "Far Corner" means a lack of interest by people in the Nation's Capitol.


----------



## desertflyer

jis said:


> That is where PTC comes in. This was a poster child of a PTC preventable accident. This was mentioned at least half a dozen times if not more during the hearing.



Yes, I get that. I watched the hearing as well.


----------



## Willbridge

A couple of other omissions. The process does not get into the "why" of PTC implementation not moving quickly, so we have the NTSB and Congress saying "do it now" while the FCC plodded along and the railroads coped with a myriad of spot issues, such as concurrence from tribal governments and urban frequency spectrum squatters.

An omission which could have been covered within the NTSB's purview was the likely reason for implementation in mid-December. The chairman checked again on the red herring of project funding deadlines. What should have been asked was whether the urgency was the imminent holiday rush. In previous years, holiday service was supplemented with extra trains to overcome the fixed capacity of the articulated Talgo's. The new schedule included an increase anyway, so why jump through hoops at holidays and then again in January? (There is a lot of internal work in a transport organization around schedule changes, sometimes resulting in accidents.)

And back in the 1960's there was another decision made by WashDOT's predecessor that contributed to the accident. That was to design the I-5 overpass for slow rail speeds. Passenger service had been discontinued a decade before, so the NP apparently accepted the state''s curve.


----------



## flitcraft

Apparently the Talgos are going away ASAP, though how the Cascades runs can continue in the meantime is unclear. Also, the Point Defiance route will be run for the indefinite future.


----------



## flitcraft

flitcraft said:


> Apparently the Talgos are going away ASAP, though how the Cascades runs can continue in the meantime is unclear. Also, the Point Defiance route will be run for the indefinite future.



https://www.seattletimes.com/seattl...amtrak-crash-near-dupont-as-soon-as-possible/


----------



## Just-Thinking-51

The NTSB and the story are talking about the 4 older train set that are 20 years old. Two of the set are owned by Amtrak, the other two are owned by Washington DOT.

Talgo is in disagreement with the NTSB findings.


----------



## Seaboard92

I’m going to take a slightly different stance than the NTSB on this one. The Talgos did fail however the casualty rate wasn’t as bad when you consider the type of derailment it was and look at the photos. The train with a load of 83 souls only lost three which is just a hair over three percent. While all loss of life is tragic it wasn’t nearly as bad as it could have been. And I feel bad talking about our friends we lost as statistics but the fact is the equipment for the most part protected the majority of the passengers and crew.


----------



## cocojacoby

Amtrak did petition the FRA last year for a waiver in preparation for leasing the two Wisconsin train sets. One did go for testing but then back to Beech Grove and inactivity ever since. No idea what they were doing with this but now they may have an incentive to complete the transaction. 

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/02/01/2018-01961/petition-for-waiver-of-compliance


----------



## jis

That specific waiver request is regarding the lack of interlock between powered side doors and engine power, and is unrelated to the buff strength and other related safety waivers that the Talgo 6s run under. Talgo 8s meet the FRA collision standards.

As with many things Amtrak, it is a mystery (outside Amtrak) as to what is going on with those sets.



Seaboard92 said:


> I’m going to take a slightly different stance than the NTSB on this one. The Talgos did fail however the casualty rate wasn’t as bad when you consider the type of derailment it was and look at the photos. The train with a load of 83 souls only lost three which is just a hair over three percent. While all loss of life is tragic it wasn’t nearly as bad as it could have been. And I feel bad talking about our friends we lost as statistics but the fact is the equipment for the most part protected the majority of the passengers and crew.



The biggest failure was of separation of cars at articulation points. To a layman, that kludge using nylon straps, seemed like a bit of a hack and was the weak point which failed spectacularly. Once cars separate and head off in different directions all bets are off, since the buff strength protection is longitudinal. Protection against getting hit from the side is considerably less. It is even worse when your own wheelset comes in and hits you from the side. That probably is something that has a higher likelihood in low slung car bodies than in high level car bodies.

The biggest non-failure OTOH was the design of the SC-44. It is quite amazing that those in the cab came out virtually unscathed.


----------



## Maglev

There were several other design features which will need to be incorporated on not just the Talgo's:

seat belts
glow-in-the-dark door instructions
child safety seat attachment points
the safety of rotating seats was called into question, although they are gone from the newer Talgo's probably for weight reduction


----------



## seat38a

Well the only option is more passenger cars from Siemens I'm assuming.


----------



## jis

Seat belts is not an NTSB recommendation at present. The recommendation is to study how to mitigate certain class of injuries. One solution could be seat belt. There are other possibilities.

And then there is this business about having a GPS moving map providing situational awareness in the cab. Chairman Summwalt felt pretty strongly about it, and it is in the recommendations I believe.

And these are NTSB recommendations. They may or may not happen. NTSB has zero power to enforce anything.


----------



## Chris I

Let’s remember that NTSB recommendations are just that: recommendations. They are often ignored (see: US auto industry, aerospace industry, etc).

As an engineer, I’m always curious about these things, and I’ve read through the entirety of Talgo’s response to the NTSB report, and I think their claims are valid, and well-supported:
https://dms.ntsb.gov/pubdms/search/document.cfm?docID=473025&docketID=62431&mkey=96496

Key takeaways:
1. Talgo maintains that the critical damage to the car containing passenger fatalities came from the concrete embankment, not from the projectile truck. At any rate, additional straps can be added to double the attach point strength. WSDOT should definitely do this.
2. Comparable crashes also had fatalities, truck separation, and car decoupling, yet the NTSB doesn’t cite this in any of those reports. Why not?
The closest comparative crash was the Philadelphia derailment, which had higher overall speed, but a lower actual speed to track speed ratio. This crash saw the complete destruction of one car, and overturning of most of the remaining cars, truck separation, etc.
The Metro-North crash was very comparable (82mph in a 30mph zone), but had the benefit of no adjacent large objects to impact. All of the cars overturned, the majority separated, and there were more fatalities. Why didn’t the NTSB cite the Metro North equipment and coupling systems as contributing to the crash? Talgo equipment would have better resisted overturning and decoupling.
3. Their analysis shows that the unique design of the Talgo equipment enabled most of the train to stay upright. Having a lower center of gravity, and with connections at both the top and bottom of the cars, the trainset really behaves as a system, and is hard to tip over (The Chambers Bay derailment illustrates this effect well). It also crumples as a system, with the end of each car crushing, instead of the lead car in the crash. Finally, their analysis also shows that had the locomotive not departed the tracks and pulled the lead cars down the embankment, the Talgo cars would have successfully negotiated the curve at 80mph.

It’s hard to guess what would have happened if traditional Amfleet or Superliner cars had been used on this trainset. I think we would have seen complete derailment of the entire train, with nearly all cars on their side or upside down. At least one would have likely hit the bridge sideways and been torn open like a can. Frankly, I think the Talgo set performed quite well given the energy involved in this crash. One of the coach carriages fell off of the bridge, landing upside down on I-5, and then was hit by a loaded tractor trailer at speed. No fatalities in that car. I couldn’t find a comparable crash anywhere for that scenario.

I think WSDOT should work with Talgo to retrofit the (4) series VI trainsets based on the recommendations in section 5 of the Talgo report. They then need to publicize this retrofit appropriately, so the traveling public has confidence in the safety of the Talgo equipment. I also think we should work to acquire the (2) ex-Wisconsin sets so that service levels can be increased when they move to the Dupont line.


----------



## frequentflyer

I posted the question some time ago, why Washington stuck with using Talgo. Not from a safety issue, though its debatable, but from a financial one. Parts and servicing would be easier and cheaper if sharing the same equipment the majority of other pax services are using.


----------



## frequentflyer

I guess those Talgo units in Indiana will end up as Coke cans too.


----------



## jis

No. They are TALGO 8 and not subject of this NTSB review. They are FRA compliant for collision/derailment safety requirements and do not require a waiver for that. They can operate anywhere in the US.


----------



## Just-Thinking-51

frequentflyer said:


> I posted the question some time ago, why Washington stuck with using Talgo. Not from a safety issue, though its debatable, but from a financial one. Parts and servicing would be easier and cheaper if sharing the same equipment the majority of other pax services are using.



Talgo service there own equipment. The parts are made by Talgo itself or subcontractors control by Talgo. It’s a turn key operation. The cost is the cost, it’s not your problem to find all the talent to make it work. Washington DOT just cuts a check, and provides oversight. Simple and easy. It does seem Washington DOT was not doing a good job with the train operation oversight. The Talgo equipment was not the cause of the derailment.


----------



## Willbridge

Alon Levy has a blog posting that discusses the "not invented here" influence on the apparent double standard in the NTSB's analysis:

https://pedestrianobservations.com/2019/05/23/the-ntsb-wants-american-trains-to-be-less-safe/

I'm not a mechanical engineer, but I was the token American at Edmonton Transit when we put the first Siemens-DueWag LRV's into service. Given my ability to speak American (i.e., to explain Canadian transit to American inquirers) I came into contact with a number of people who wondered why we weren't buying the Boeing Vertol Standard LRV instead. We were attacked in the national media by a Canadian cabinet minister for not waiting to buy the so-called Canadian LRV. Everything that I learned in responding to those questions or comments convinced me that our people had made a brilliant selection.

It was funniest when an UMTA official from Washington, DC touted the Boeing SLRV while riding the new DueWag car. Had we chosen the Boeing product, we would not have been ready for the 1978 British Commonwealth Games and critics of the project would have had something to genuinely find fault with.


----------



## jiml

Willbridge said:


> I came into contact with a number of people who wondered why we weren't buying the Boeing Vertol Standard LRV instead. We were attacked in the national media by a Canadian cabinet minister for not waiting to buy the so-called Canadian LRV. Everything that I learned in responding to those questions or comments convinced me that our people had made a brilliant selection.
> 
> It was funniest when an UMTA official from Washington, DC touted the Boeing SLRV while riding the new DueWag car. Had we chosen the Boeing product, we would not have been ready for the 1978 British Commonwealth Games and critics of the project would have had something to genuinely find fault with.



This was an excellent sidebar. The part I've quoted above provides very interesting insight into how these decisions are still made in Canada (and perhaps less noticeably in the US). VIA Rail's recent decision to buy Siemens over Bombardier has attracted a lot of the same attention you've described and high-level government officials would surely have intervened on behalf of the latter if they hadn't already stepped in a giant pile of scandal with SNC-Lavalin. Thanks for posting.


----------



## Willbridge

jiml said:


> This was an excellent sidebar. The part I've quoted above provides very interesting insight into how these decisions are still made in Canada (and perhaps less noticeably in the US). VIA Rail's recent decision to buy Siemens over Bombardier has attracted a lot of the same attention you've described and high-level government officials would surely have intervened on behalf of the latter if they hadn't already stepped in a giant pile of scandal with SNC-Lavalin. Thanks for posting.


I won't take this further off track, but sometime when there is a thread about equipment politics I learned a few other things in Canada. And as fans of rail history know, the private railroads and transit companies have also had unexplained love for one equipment supplier or another.


----------



## jiml

Willbridge said:


> I won't take this further off track, but sometime when there is a thread about equipment politics I learned a few other things in Canada. And as fans of rail history know, the private railroads and transit companies have also had unexplained love for one equipment supplier or another.



There's a book to be written!


----------



## Anderson

Willbridge said:


> I won't take this further off track, but sometime when there is a thread about equipment politics I learned a few other things in Canada. And as fans of rail history know, the private railroads and transit companies have also had unexplained love for one equipment supplier or another.


At least in some cases, it becomes a case of fleet commonality. I might prefer to have my entire fleet be something mediocre than half great and half mediocre. Also, sometimes you get supplier lock-in if you do something stupid like use a non-standard loading gauge.


----------



## jiml

One need look no further than Southwest Airlines.


----------



## jis

jiml said:


> One need look no further than Southwest Airlines.



Other examples are Ryanair (Ireland/Europe), IndiGo, Spiceair (both India, Indigo is India’s Southwest and the largest regional airline of Asia)


----------



## Thirdrail7

Sound Transit is taking their lumps for not making sure the crews were properly trained on their territory.

Sound Transit removes top safety chief after report on fatal Amtrak crash
https://www.seattletimes.com/seattl...ety-chief-based-on-fatal-amtrak-crash-report/



> The Amtrak engineer involved in the 2017 derailment had operated a locomotive there three times as part of his training, along with seven to 10 observational trips with Amtrak colleagues. Amtrak apologized afterward and promised to beef up its training.
> 
> “Sound Transit staff wrongly believed that WSDOT, not Sound Transit, was responsible for overseeing all activities related to Amtrak training and qualifications,” Rogoff said in a Wednesday memo to the transit board.
> 
> The transit agency also is forming a separate safety division that Rogoff says will bring a laser focus.


----------



## CHamilton

'This month, the rail advocacy group All Aboard Washington telegraphed impatience with the delays and said the bypass route should be reactivated as soon as possible.

'"We believe that further postponing Cascades service on the Point Defiance Bypass - for which we have already paid $181 million - is detrimental to the interests of the Puget Sound region, the Pacific Northwest, and the traveling public as a whole," All Aboard Washington's leadership wrote in a blog post. "The taxpayers of Washington state have invested a significant sum of money to improve a useful service along a busy corridor. Let’s make that improved service a reality without delay."'

https://www.nwnewsnetwork.org/post/...des-service-2020-beset-multiple-uncertainties


----------



## Just-Thinking-51

It helps that the BNSF route had landslides that were blocking the passenger trains.

I do agree it past due, but it seem Denver’s RTD heavy rail line still has flaggers on duty since the train may or may not actively the grade level crossing system.


----------



## Willbridge

Just-Thinking-51 said:


> It helps that the BNSF route had landslides that were blocking the passenger trains.
> 
> I do agree it past due, but it seem Denver’s RTD heavy rail line still has flaggers on duty since the train may or may not actively the grade level crossing system.


I haven't checked recently but the contract operator for the Denver A, B, and G-Lines was down to flagging a couple of locations.

G-Line = https://www.rtd-denver.com/sites/default/files/2019-09/G Line flaggers 8.2.19.pdf
A-Line = https://www.rtd-denver.com/sites/de...A Line Denver Quiet Zones 2.8.19 NR Final.pdf
A & B-Line = https://www.denverpost.com/2018/12/21/rtd-flaggers-a-line-b-line-crossing/


----------



## Anderson

CHamilton said:


> 'This month, the rail advocacy group All Aboard Washington telegraphed impatience with the delays and said the bypass route should be reactivated as soon as possible.
> 
> '"We believe that further postponing Cascades service on the Point Defiance Bypass - for which we have already paid $181 million - is detrimental to the interests of the Puget Sound region, the Pacific Northwest, and the traveling public as a whole," All Aboard Washington's leadership wrote in a blog post. "The taxpayers of Washington state have invested a significant sum of money to improve a useful service along a busy corridor. Let’s make that improved service a reality without delay."'
> 
> https://www.nwnewsnetwork.org/post/...des-service-2020-beset-multiple-uncertainties


From a safety perspective, presuming that (for the moment) the schedule were left as-is time-wise, how slow could the trains be run on the bypass on the approaches to That Curve?


----------



## Just-Thinking-51

There a 30mph switch, then the 30mph curve that was the cause of the derailment. So I think how slow you can go while on the straight away southbound before the curve is irrelevant. The engineer miss a small sign, and had a lack of knowledge of the territory. With PTC and a few bigger signs no reason not to run at speed. The PTC will give a penalty brake application if you overspeed before the curve or switch. The lack of using this route is politically in nature. Who is to blame game, still going on. See the new Safety Director at Sounder Transit post above.


----------



## jis

Plans to beef up Amtrak Cascades service in 2020 beset by multiple uncertainties 

https://www.nwnewsnetwork.org/post/...VUjX94G2f_ZTKG-seDsOnloXJqbQ8huzUN6B7sj_cce8s


----------



## Just-Thinking-51

jis said:


> Plans to beef up Amtrak Cascades service in 2020 beset by multiple uncertainties
> 
> https://www.nwnewsnetwork.org/post/...VUjX94G2f_ZTKG-seDsOnloXJqbQ8huzUN6B7sj_cce8s



Good read, a bit overwhelming how many roadblocks still present. Amazing how hard it can be to do something so simple.


----------



## zephyr17

Lakewood doesn't want 79 mph trains through their town on tracks that were previously a low use/low speed freight line. They were doing everything they could to throw roadblocks at it before service began with 501, and the wreck gave them leverage. They are seizing on every little thing. NIMBYism at its worst. That, combined with Sound Transit now doing post accident CYA when the NTSB revealed a virtually non existent safety culture there.


----------



## Willbridge

Before WWII this was a main line. (The kink was added to the downgraded line to lower the cost of building the highway underpass.) On any rail project it seems that NIMBY's expect the rail line to deteriorate and then be abandoned. In some cases real estate sales people have been the source of that idea.


----------



## Maglev

The engineer of Amtrak 501 is suing Amtrak, saying he was improperly trained for the route and the locomotive.

https://komonews.com/news/local/eng...71jwZzmyJY0OOavCFZAkRSLR2jzdZ2E3dg1PwYnpUYv4M


----------



## Thirdrail7

So, he's suing Amtrak saying he was improperly trained but readily admits he took control of something he wasn't trained on?


----------



## MARC Rider

Thirdrail7 said:


> So, he's suing Amtrak saying he was improperly trained but readily admits he took control of something he wasn't trained on?


He didn't know he was improperly trained until the train derailed.


----------



## Acela150

Thirdrail7 said:


> So, he's suing Amtrak saying he was improperly trained but readily admits he took control of something he wasn't trained on?



I'm curious to the logic as well. But, let the legal system figure this out. 

As far as the "being properly trained" on the Physical Characteristics of the RR I'll give you my two cents on things. 

During my time at NS the "Choo Choo U" section of things for them is 15 days. So three weeks. I then had 3 months of OJT before marking up and getting my Conductor Card. 3 months of OJT is not enough time to learn Physical Characteristics of hundreds of miles of Railroad, learn the crucial rules like NORAC Rule 80. (Movement at Restricted Speed) I was given 2 weeks to learn the railroad between PHIL and BELL on the Corridor as well as PARK and GLEN on the Harrisburg Line. Amtrak required 3 R/T's on the head end to even take the PC test. I'm not kidding, I took 10 R/T's for each section of RR. So two a day. I truly believe that I could have been perfectly fine with 3 R/T's on the PH line. But there is a HUGE difference between day running and night running. So I did 1 R/T during daylight hours, and one after dark. Best choice I made. Plain and simple. So bottom line as far as OJT went at NS. I had 10 weeks of it. When I went to the division office to Mark Up, they asked if we saw everything that we should have saw, or if we needed more time to see things. Between myself and one of my Brother Conductors, we told them that 10 weeks of OJT is a joke, that we felt rushed, and that the practice of rushing CT's through OJT will lead to more and more incidents. I told them that I hadn't been to a yard that we served 7 days a week and I'd like two weeks to go over that yard. They laughed and said, "Get a pilot if you go there." 2 weeks later I got called for a train to that yard, and I asked for a pilot Conductor. I explained to the crew caller who was the best, that I hadn't been there and so and so from the division office told me to request a pilot. After I hung up with them 10 minutes later the Terminal Super called me and asked why I marked up without going to the yard. I told him what happened. So once he got my side of the story, he was understanding. But the guys and gals that work as middle upper management laughing at a request for two weeks to go to a yard that we served 7 days a week is horrifying to me. I've interviewed to go back to NS twice, and they reduced the period of OJT from 3 months to 2 months. My main concern is that they are putting out guys and gals on the RR to learn hundreds of miles of RR in such a short amount of time. These days it's all about layoffs. Precision Scheduled Railroading (PSR) is all about shareholder value, getting things to their destination on-time, not safety. Derailments have gone up dramatically over the past 5 years, since CSX became the first US Freight Carrier to adopt PSR, followed by UP, and NS. PSR is an extremely dangerous trend. And I truly believe that the only way to end it, is that Congress steps in. 

Now as far as Amtrak's training methods on the T&E side. I can't speak to any of it since I'm not an Amtrak employee. I've heard that it's very detailed. I know that for new hire engineers there is about 2 years of OJT before being marked up and running you're on your own. And honestly, that's the way it should be. With Amtrak you're hauling people at a wide range of speeds that top out on the NEC at 150 mph. I recently was speaking with the conductor and engineer of a train that I ride frequently. The day before I was talking with them, it came up that the engineer had a student running for a certain period of time. And the student was running in the 150 mph zone in RI near TF Green. He opened it up and kept an eye of the speedometer and panicked at 147 and throttled off before he should have. That is part of the training. The speed is no joke and it'll mess with you. 

Bottom line, Passenger and Freight are completely different beasts. But, IMO Amtrak is doing the right things as far as training for Student Engineers. Freight has work to do right now. Right now as it stands freight is laying thousands of employees off for the shareholders, and the heck with safety. Even when they did hire people it was a rushed process. If someone makes one wrong move, it can injure that person at a minimum, and kill them and potentially others in a worst case scenario.


----------



## John Santos

Thanks Acela150. That was very informative.
Is the main problem with PSR that it treats train crew as interchangeable parts and doesn't account for the fact that each person has different experience and training? Resulting in people running trains on routes and equipment where they've had minimal training or insufficient experience, because the RRs can cut payroll and save money by doing that?


----------



## west point

Now we have another incident of a train hitting a MOW truck. Some one may have goofed ?


----------



## jis

west point said:


> Now we have another incident of a train hitting a MOW truck. Some one may have goofed ?



Apparently the MoW crew got block on one track and then placed their truck on the other track.


----------



## Thirdrail7

Acela150 said:


> They laughed and said, "Get a pilot if you go there." 2 weeks later I got called for a train to that yard, and I asked for a pilot Conductor. I explained to the crew caller who was the best, that I hadn't been there and so and so from the division office told me to request a pilot. After I hung up with them 10 minutes later the Terminal Super called me and asked why I marked up without going to the yard. I told him what happened. So once he got my side of the story, he was understanding.



So...you were unsure...and you asked for assistance. If he felt uncomfortable, perhaps he should have asked for assistance as well.


----------



## Acela150

Thirdrail7 said:


> So...you were unsure...and you asked for assistance. If he felt uncomfortable, perhaps he should have asked for assistance as well.



I definitely agree with you. But let's be honest, not everyone thinks like I did. And to me, that's a little scary.


----------



## crescent-zephyr

Thirdrail7 said:


> So...you were unsure...and you asked for assistance. If he felt uncomfortable, perhaps he should have asked for assistance as well.


 and he got laughed at for doing so....


----------



## Acela150

crescent-zephyr said:


> and he got laughed at for doing so....



By a high up division manager non the less. But then again, he was the kinda guy who had never touched ballast or had done anything that a Conductor does.


----------



## Thirdrail7

crescent-zephyr said:


> and he got laughed at for doing so....



So? Acela150 handled it accordingly. He asked for the pilot, received the call and told what happened. If someone laughing at you impacts your ability to use your judgement when it comes to safety, perhaps you shouldn't be in a position that puts lives directly in your hands.


----------



## Acela150

Thirdrail7 said:


> So? Acela150 handled it accordingly. He asked for the pilot, received the call and told what happened. If someone laughing at you impacts your ability to use your judgement when it comes to safety, perhaps you shouldn't be in a position that puts lives directly in your hands.



Well said, and I think the part that was most disturbing to me was someone who had zero experience doing the job of a Conductor laughing at a simple request. My terminal super on the other hand was a Conductor, and a rather famous one for NS. He actually thanked me for asking for a pilot since I wasn't familiar with something. I believe said Terminal Super/Former Conductor is in management with Amtrak these days.


----------



## flitcraft

The Seattle Times posted this item on the death of one of the Washington State Patrol officers who was instrumental in investigating the Cascades accident using drone technology. WSP trooper whose work was key to investigation of 2017 DuPont Amtrak derailment dies from COVID

Ironic that this article came out today, after the EB crash. Sadly, the officer was only 38 years old. And, strangely to me, the Washington State Patrol is counting his death as 'in the line of duty,' saying that he caught COVID on the job. I'm not sure how they know that, and even if he did, that isn't usually what we mean when we say that an officer died in the line of duty. No matter what, though, it's tragic when a young person like that with kids dies from COVID these days.


----------



## neroden

flitcraft said:


> The Seattle Times posted this item on the death of one of the Washington State Patrol officers who was instrumental in investigating the Cascades accident using drone technology. WSP trooper whose work was key to investigation of 2017 DuPont Amtrak derailment dies from COVID
> 
> Ironic that this article came out today, after the EB crash. Sadly, the officer was only 38 years old. And, strangely to me, the Washington State Patrol is counting his death as 'in the line of duty,' saying that he caught COVID on the job. I'm not sure how they know that, and even if he did, that isn't usually what we mean when we say that an officer died in the line of duty. No matter what, though, it's tragic when a young person like that with kids dies from COVID these days.



Antivax insanity is apparently unusually common among police, more than among the general population, unfortunately. They don't know whether he was vaccinated, but statistically, he probably wasn't.


----------



## sitzplatz17

flitcraft said:


> The Seattle Times posted this item on the death of one of the Washington State Patrol officers who was instrumental in investigating the Cascades accident using drone technology. WSP trooper whose work was key to investigation of 2017 DuPont Amtrak derailment dies from COVID
> 
> Ironic that this article came out today, after the EB crash. Sadly, the officer was only 38 years old. And, strangely to me, the Washington State Patrol is counting his death as 'in the line of duty,' saying that he caught COVID on the job. I'm not sure how they know that, and even if he did, that isn't usually what we mean when we say that an officer died in the line of duty. No matter what, though, it's tragic when a young person like that with kids dies from COVID these days.


COVID has been the #1 killer of law enforcement officers in 2020 and 2021. I saw the article said it wasn’t clear if he was vaccinated or not but his age and health coupled with the fatality rate for non-vaccinated individuals would indicate he wasn’t.
Back to Amtrak: indeed very eerie that this was published right after the the EB accident.


----------



## NW cannonball

sitzplatz17 said:


> COVID has been the #1 killer of law enforcement officers in 2020 and 2021. I saw the article said it wasn’t clear if he was vaccinated or not but his age and health coupled with the fatality rate for non-vaccinated individuals would indicate he wasn’t.
> Back to Amtrak: indeed very eerie that this was published right after the the EB accident.


Indeed, so far this year Law Enforcement officers deaths have been more from Covid-19 than the previous years top cop-killer which was "Motor Vehicle Accidents" 
Search for '2021-Mid-Year-Fatality-Report_FINAL.pdf' published by NLEOMF


----------



## Chris I

To change topics a bit, where are they at with the Point Defiance Bypass these days? Are they expecting to start using the route at some point this year?


----------



## zephyr17

Chris I said:


> To change topics a bit, where are they at with the Point Defiance Bypass these days? Are they expecting to start using the route at some point this year?


No official date yet, they started crew qualification runs over the summer. There are rumors of an October 31st date. I do expect it before the end of 2021 in any case.


----------



## neroden

Still no date for return of passenger train service at site of deadly DuPont derailment


The testing is done. Engineers are trained. But when will train service actually return to the Point Defiance Bypass, the site of a deadly 2017 derailment?



mynorthwest.com





No news.


----------



## Cal

zephyr17 said:


> No official date yet, they started crew qualification runs over the summer. There are rumors of an October 31st date. I do expect it before the end of 2021 in any case.


Seems like my December starlight trip will be over it. It’s a shame, I booked it for august to go along the water


----------



## flitcraft

Cal said:


> Seems like my December starlight trip will be over it. It’s a shame, I booked it for august to go along the water


Well, if that is the case, then it is a shame, but keep in mind that you'll be past wildfire season, and the mountains will be in their winter finery by then. So maybe that will balance it out for you.


----------



## Cal

flitcraft said:


> Well, if that is the case, then it is a shame, but keep in mind that you'll be past wildfire season, and the mountains will be in their winter finery by then. So maybe that will balance it out for you.


Yes, I am really hoping the Cascades are snowy!!


----------



## flitcraft

Cal said:


> Yes, I am really hoping the Cascades are snowy!!



We're already getting snow in the mountains. By December, absent a historically unprecedented lack of precipitation in the mountains, you should have a front row seat for what winter brings to the Cascades. 

Quick story: once taking the Starlight in mid March, we were sitting in the lounge alongside a small group from Australia who were excited about possibly seeing snow for the first time. Sure enough, going south into the Cascades, we started seeing small, rather dirty patches of snow, and they stayed glued to the windows, taking pictures of the snow. Within thirty minutes, we were deep into the Cascades, with majestic pines crowding the rails, covered in pristine snow, and more was falling. Our Aussie friends ended up deleting their first batch of 'snow' pictures...


----------



## Cal

flitcraft said:


> We're already getting snow in the mountains. By December, absent a historically unprecedented lack of precipitation in the mountains, you should have a front row seat for what winter brings to the Cascades.
> 
> Quick story: once taking the Starlight in mid March, we were sitting in the lounge alongside a small group from Australia who were excited about possibly seeing snow for the first time. Sure enough, going south into the Cascades, we started seeing small, rather dirty patches of snow, and they stayed glued to the windows, taking pictures of the snow. Within thirty minutes, we were deep into the Cascades, with majestic pines crowding the rails, covered in pristine snow, and more was falling. Our Aussie friends ended up deleting their first batch of 'snow' pictures...


Good to know!

And I will be no better than the Aussies! I was over the moon when I saw snow on the EB.


----------

