2021 Montana crash - Bent track

shop deals on amazon
Advertise with us
Shop deals on ebay
Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
lordsigma said:
I remember some rough rides on the silvers but lately it seems to not be quite as bad down that way. The roughest I recall is Nebraska on the Zephyr, which is BNSF.
Click to expand...
As I said above ex-CB&Q BNSF.

The best BNSF tracks are generally ex-SantaFe AFAICT ex-BN was never as good as ex SantaFe.
 
jis said:
As I said above ex-CB&Q BNSF.

The best BNSF tracks are generally ex-SantaFe AFAICT ex-BN was never as good as ex SantaFe.
Click to expand...

Thanks. This is where my relatively newbie-ness (mid 2010s) to rail enthusiasm shows its colors. Not knowing which one that was. 🤣Santa Fe I did know. More familiar history wise in New England RRs but west side of things not so much.
 
Still lots of really rough track around Memphis on the CONO Route.

The worst I ever experienced on Amtrak was in Western Kansas, on the SW Chief Route, when I was thrown out of my bed several times, but this has been fixed.
 
lordsigma said:
I remember some rough rides on the silvers but lately it seems to not be quite as bad down that way. I rode the Auto Train in October and the Meteor in January and I don’t remember anything being particularly noticeable rough. Always some bumps of course. The roughest I recall is Nebraska on the Zephyr, which is BNSF.
Click to expand...
It's been some years since I've been on the Silvers so my experience isn't current, but the water launching itself across me was quite memorable. Agree about the former Q through Nebraska and eastern Colorado, it's rough. The SW Chief over the former AT&SF Northern/Passenger main through Kansas and southeastern Colorado probably won the prize, when it was ripping over stick rail at 90 mph. They lowered the speed to 79 mph which improved it, then they relaid much of it with second hand CWR when Kansas, Colorado and Amtrak kicked in for capital improvement, so now it is pretty good and no longer in the running.

However, none of those was unsafe. All were maintained to Class 4 and 5 standards and were regularly inspected. Even when it felt like the train going to bounce itself right off the rails pounding over 1940s jointed rail at 90.
 
jis said:
As I said above ex-CB&Q BNSF.

The best BNSF tracks are generally ex-SantaFe AFAICT ex-BN was never as good as ex SantaFe.
Click to expand...
Are the rails on ex-CB&Q still from the CB&Q? I would've thought they would have been replaced many times over by now. I don't see how they would still be noticeably rougher.
 
No matter how well your prepared for a emergency situation, in a real emergency your ability to adapt and overcome is key. Frame work, case studies, safety briefing, equipment training is important. But when stuff hits the fan your ability to adapt and overcome obstacles will win the day. Or at least transfer the mess to the hospital. (From a Paramedic’s viewpoint.)

It’s interesting to note how NTSB does not have a fix interview style. I was reading about a ice storm in Ft Worth, and there format is very different from this one. Not a problem, but noticeable difference in interviews techniques.
 
Acela150 said:
Again, I can not comment about emergency situational training any further.
Click to expand...
Not asking you to. The NTSB is clearly unhappy with the crew's response and whether or not you or even Amtrak itself are satisfied is immaterial in my view. It is NTSB's responsibility to call out issues and they are.

I do suggest that you read the Crashworthiness/Survival Factors Report even if you cannot comment on it. One of the issues, and I am paraphrasing here, is the crew as a whole did not follow Amtrak’s training and procedures. Pretty much no one from the crew took responsibility for organizing them and their response was much more ad hoc than procedures called for, and was throughout the event response, not just initially. On the plus side, the NTSB implicitly praised the way the OBS crew in particular self organized to effect rescues while still unhappy that they had to self-organize.

I hold no opinion either way on the crew's response, I am just giving my impression of what and how the NTSB called things out.
 
Cal said:
Are the rails on ex-CB&Q still from the CB&Q? I would've thought they would have been replaced many times over by now. I don't see how they would still be noticeably rougher.
Click to expand...
Do not know about the former Q. That line was and is a more important line than the former Santa Fe Northern/Passenger line and almost certainly got more attention. Santa Fe's line through western Kansas and eastern Colorado mostly became little more than a glorified industrial lead that AT&SF and BNSF had to maintain well enough to support Amtrak’s speed and schedule per the Rail Passenger Act of 1970 and the related Amtrak contract. They didn't want to and had no need to make capital investments on it for their own purposes, except for the relatively short section between La Junta and Las Animas Jct which they use for traffic to Texas. So the last major trackwork there was in the 1940s or maybe the early 50s. I don't think the same issues applied to the former Q in Nebraska and Colorado.
 
zephyr17 said:
However, none of those was unsafe. All were maintained to Class 4 and 5 standards and were regularly inspected. Even when it felt like the train going to bounce itself right off the rails pounding over 1940s jointed rail at 90.
Click to expand...
I have said this somewhere before, but I will say it again: The limit of safety is beyond, if not far beyond the limit for comfort. The FRA standards are SAFETY standards, so even if uncomfortable, it would still be safe in so far as derailing is concerned. That does not mean it is safe to walk around without hanging on, however. Common practice is normally to maintain track to one class higher than the speed limit necessitates, thereby reducing the frequency of the need to apply slow orders due to track deficiencies.

Rail: Based on the average rate of new rail purchases from when it was in the AREA / AREMA bulletins, the assumed life of rail in track is near 100 years. However, that does not mean the rail in a heavy duty mainline will be in there until it is that old. Usually after some defined limit of wear or rate of defects detected, it will be removed and "cascaded" down to a lower speed track, which rail may even go another step down to a low speed yard or industry track. By the time rail is pulled up for scrap, it is truly life expired.

As the the ride on the City of New Orleans being rough, the Illinois Central was about the last of the major railroads to go to use of welded rail, and they tended to stretch the use of rail a little more than others. They are still playing a certain amount of catch up.

An example: Before the City of New Orleans was taken off the Grenada District passenger main sometime in the 90's or maybe even later, I don't recall, that track had a 79 mph limit on 112 lb jointed rail worn to the point that the tops of the joint bars were shiny from wheel flange contact. I rode that line between Jackson MS and Memphis sometime in the 80's, and the ride quality was, in one word, exciting, and they were definitely doing the 79 mph limit, if maybe not a little more. The rail had 1930's or 40's rolling dates best I recall. (Incidentally, the 112RE section was modified in 1947 to the 115RE section which is still used extensively, although not usually installed new in the heaviest traveled main tracks.) Right now the northern approach to Memphis Central station is in welded relay 115RE rail with dates as far back as 1951. Speed limit is 30mph, and traffic is Amtrak plus some local freight. Through freight takes another route through the city.
 
Last edited:
The above picture is from the 3 page preliminary report on the accident found by clicking on the first item in the NTSB Docket - Docket Management System

"On September 25, 2021, about 3:47 p.m. local time, westbound National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) train 7 (also known as the Empire Builder) carrying 154 people derailed in a right-hand curve at milepost 1014.57 on the BNSF Railway (BNSF) Hi Line Subdivision near Joplin, Montana.1 (See figure.) As a result of the derailment, 3 passengers died, and 44 passengers and crew were transported to local hospitals with injuries. Damage was estimated by Amtrak to be over $22 million."

There is a lot of information to be found it the documents attached in the referenced site that I have yet to go through. However, here are some of the things on the track with a few of my comments thrown in.

From the employee timetable pages in these documents, mileposts in the locality:
971.0 Burnham
1011.9 Joplin end double track (shown as No. 24 turnout on profile.) Main 1 is straight side.
1014.57 derailment location
1014.8 begin Buelow siding (shown as 1014.7 on profile)
1016.7 end Buelow siding
1024.0 Chester
1065.5 Shelby east, begin double track
1065.8 Shelby
1090.0 Cut Bank

Maximum Speed Limits: 79P/60F. If train has over 100 tons per operating brake, 55

Nearest adjacent speed restrictions
End 993.3: 70P/60F
Joplin end double track 1011.9: 50 all trains
Begin 1023.0: 70P/60F
Beulow siding turnouts: 35 all trains (shown as No. 20 turnout on profile, hence very conservative speed.)

Straight track just beyond end 1d33m curve (that would be 3,697 feet radius)
(GHH: On the profile, the curve appears to be between about mileposts 1014.34 and 1014.62. Speed calcs for this curve: Balance superelevation for this radius, 6.77 inches for 79mph, 3.91 inches for 60mph. (EDIT) Actual superelevation per trackwalker is 4 1/2 inches.) Balance speed for this superelevation would be 64.4 mph.)
Grade: up 0.93% westbound on profile.
Elevation appears to be about 3,350 feet on the track profile.
Rail shown as 132RE laid in 1986.
 
Last edited:
George Harris said:
(GHH: On the profile, the curve appears to be between about mileposts 1014.34 and 1014.62. Speed calcs for this curve: Balance speeds, 6.77 inches for 79mph, 3.91 inches for 60mph. Actual superelevation I have yet to find, but i would suspect it to be 4 inches.)
Click to expand...
According to the Surface Gang Foreman it was to be 4 1/2 inches
 
zephyr17 said:
Not asking you to. The NTSB is clearly unhappy with the crew's response and whether or not you or even Amtrak itself are satisfied is immaterial in my view. It is NTSB's responsibility to call out issues and they are.

I do suggest that you read the Crashworthiness/Survival Factors Report even if you cannot comment on it. One of the issues, and I am paraphrasing here, is the crew as a whole did not follow Amtrak’s training and procedures. Pretty much no one from the crew took responsibility for organizing them and their response was much more ad hoc than procedures called for, and was throughout the event response, not just initially. On the plus side, the NTSB implicitly praised the way the OBS crew in particular self organized to effect rescues while still unhappy that they had to self-organize.

I hold no opinion either way on the crew's response, I am just giving my impression of what and how the NTSB called things out.
Click to expand...
I understand your point. I do have to bow out as much as I want to continue the topic.
 
So just a random comment about the emergency management of the Amtrak crew.

In my experience working as a Paramedic getting good information from the dispatcher really helps in dealing with a situation. Driving up on a multiple car accident or witness one. The ambulance crew will swing in action but in my opinion not as efficient if they had 4-6 minutes to mentally prepare for the event.

To be involved in a derailment and expect the train personnel to immediately take charge of the situation is a bit disingenuous. The crew just experienced a once a lifetime event. Automatic there first concern would be themselves, then there coworkers, and lastly the passenger.

Sorry, but if a uniformed 911 provider collapses he/she will be treated and transported first. This is done so that the rest of the team on scene will know if they get injured or go down, they will be taken care of.

So as someone who has managed a few emergency. I have no problem with this crew.
 
Just-Thinking-51 said:
So just a random comment about the emergency management of the Amtrak crew.

In my experience working as a Paramedic getting good information from the dispatcher really helps in dealing with a situation. Driving up on a multiple car accident or witness one. The ambulance crew will swing in action but in my opinion not as efficient if they had 4-6 minutes to mentally prepare for the event.

To be involved in a derailment and expect the train personnel to immediately take charge of the situation is a bit disingenuous. The crew just experienced a once a lifetime event. Automatic there first concern would be themselves, then there coworkers, and lastly the passenger.

Sorry, but if a uniformed 911 provider collapses he/she will be treated and transported first. This is done so that the rest of the team on scene will know if they get injured or go down, they will be taken care of.

So as someone who has managed a few emergency. I have no problem with this crew.
Click to expand...
Same when I was an EMT/ Firefighter while in College back in the day.
 
TrackWalker said:
According to the Surface Gang Foreman it was to be 4 1/2 inches.
Click to expand...
OK, thanks. I will modify my post accordingly. Balance speed would be 64.4 mph, hence over balance for the freight train speed limit, which is not desirable. Given that the location is near the top of a fairly long grade, freight trains will likely be going less than the speed limit, if not much less, and therefore under the balancing speed. This would be particularly true for trains entering/exiting the siding with its 35 mph entry speed. If I were the one making the decision on that matter, I would reduce the passenger train speed limit to 70 mph, and thereby be able to reduce the superelevation to 2 1/2 inches. This would have a balance speed of 48.0 mph, which would probably still be excessive for most of the freight trains due to grades in the vicinity. Since the location is near the top of the grade in both directions, this reduction would have a negligible effect on passenger train run time.
 
Last edited:
George Harris said:
As the the ride on the City of New Orleans being rough, the Illinois Central was about the last of the major railroads to go to use of welded rail, and they tended to stretch the use of rail a little more than others. They are still playing a certain amount of catch up.
Click to expand...
Interesting tidbit: I remember when MED was getting welded rail (I want to say late 70's or early 80's - I was a kid and my dad was pointing it out to me).
 

Latest posts

Back
Top