Craig Townsend said:
Steve Featherkile said: Let’s not hang the engineer before the facts are known.
Ahh but it’s always the crews fault… (http://www.largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-undecided.gif)The full NTSB report will be ready in 2-3 years from now and all but a few people will have forgotten about the wreck. In all of the reports, I haven’t read/heard anything about the engineer being alive or dead.
He’s alive, injured, and wisely lawyered up.
This is very sad. There has been a rash of passenger rail incidents in the last few years in the Northeast - I hope it is not a trend.
@Stan - Thanks for the photo link. That was a good batch. You can get a good idea of how the wreck unfolded by looking at the scars on the ground. It looks to me like the engine and the first car followed one path while the rest of the train followed another. This has nothing to do with the cause, but rather how that first car suffered so much more damaged then the rest.
Those broken poles back up the track most likely tore that car apart.
Sad day.
7 dead at last report.
John
I’ve been hearing about it on the radio all day, since this is a local story for our stations. But I just saw the photos recently, holy cow, what a tragedy for at least seven families.
Also a commercial nightmare, with Baltimore-NYC commuting hosed up and the main corridor shut down.
Doubt it relates but interesting anyway …
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/20150514_SEPTA_train_hit_by_projectile_before_Amtrak_crash.html
BTW…Jeff they do run push pull in the NEC as well
Watching the news, my wife asked me what the conductor said about the crash. I said it was the engineer who was at the controls. But once again, what is the function/interplay of engineer and conductor in modern train parlance? She thought the conductor is the guy who collects the tickets.
Joe Rusz said:
Watching the news, my wife asked me what the conductor said about the crash. I said it was the engineer who was at the controls. But once again, what is the function/interplay of engineer and conductor in modern train parlance? She thought the conductor is the guy who collects the tickets.
She’s right. The conductor or more typically the assistant conductor do collect the tickets.
The engineer is supposed to call out signal indications (other than green) over the radio to the conductor. The conductor is then supposed to repeat the stated signal indication over the radio. Basically acknowledging that the engineer is acknowledging a restrictive signal indication. The conductor will also radio to the engineer in advance of slow orders that have been issued for the trip/their crew points of travel. The conductor also radios to the engineer “highball” when ready to depart from stations. They also communicate over the radio for various issues, i.e. mechanical troubles, unexpected events, etc…
I bring my radio scanner on every Amtrak trip I take and it is interesting to listen in on these communications. I also use my phone GPS speed app to see how fast we are going. Fun to do on the Pacific Surfliner and Southwest Chief. These are the only double decker trains permitted to go 90mph in the U.S. thanks to the Santa Fe railroad implementing Automatic Train Stop back in the early 50s when such a system was required to run a train over 79mph.
I to used my phones GPS app to track speed and Google maps to follow my location. And both directions the conductor collected my tickets.
Am I right, the conductor is in overall control of the entire train and the engineer is in control of operation of the locomotive?
Back from the days of Casey Jones, it is always the case of “keeping the schedule” as the management’s unwritten guiding authority. Speed limits are posted and expected to be adhered to, but the train crew is expected to keep the schedule. The problems of the reputation of keeping the schedule are the crews and the unrealistic schedule is the goals and are the advertised marketing tool. A good engineer and crew maintains the advertised schedule and I would say unofficially rewarded over the engineer/crew that has a perfect safety record. Just my thoughts from more than 10 years of having to answer to upper management about was the train on time.
Sounds like the engineer is being very compliant.
The investigators have reviewed the on board video and they have to the recorders so they should be able to get to the bottom of this fairly quickly. The final report should be interesting a year from now.
I think it’s astonishing that there weren’t more fatalities. I’m guessing there must not have been many passengers in the first car – if there had been more in that car, surely the death toll would have been a lot higher.
Amtrak having a bad week it seems:
http://fox6now.com/2015/05/14/developing-amtrak-locomotive-catches-fire-near-walker-barclay/
Watching news reports of the gandy dancers rebuilding the track. Looks like they are using sectional, snap track.
Will it has started first lawsuit has been filed, so everybody better grab a number because 200 million is not going to go far.
Ray Dunakin said:
I think it’s astonishing that there weren’t more fatalities. I’m guessing there must not have been many passengers in the first car – if there had been more in that car, surely the death toll would have been a lot higher.
News said that the first car was a quiet car, no phones or talking, that probably was why it was limited.
Today, Friday, LA TIMES reports the speed increments of the locomotive minutes and seconds prior to the turn.
My question is what chance the loco, on its own, increased speed independent of the engineer’s actions. My understanding 80+ MPH was not unusual X distance from the turn so any malfunction would not reveal itself until the speed decrease point is reached prior to the turn.
The warning device: I learned much from the eight UP and BNSF engineer/family visitors in the cab of BSNF’s newest road diesel at RR Days, Fullerton. All eight commented on the warning device that was quite visible near the engineer’s controls. They said BSNF was testing them and a concern for one outcome is be the second person in the cab could be argued as not necessary. All had anecdotes, original or repeated, of the need for two humans, not one, to manage four 4,400 HP locos pulling over 100 freight cars.
Of note: BSNF no longer permits, for security, family visits in the cab of their engines – only when there is a display such as during Railroad Days in Fullerton. Prior to moving after the show, the loco got a through inspection considering the cab had over 4,000 visitors during the show’s two days.
Wendell
Hmm… the train was apparently going about 70 mph 65 seconds before the turn, then accelerated to 106/107…
The engineer stated he tried to slow the train down for the turn… (what was he asleep?), then something about searching his bag afterwards to call 911.
Now he has no memory of the accident at all, because he had a concussion… (and a lawyer, is that related?).
Oh well…
Well, this is interesting. It seems that the Positive Train Control system is installed in the area of the curve, but was not turned on, because the bureaucrats couldn’t figure out how to get enough band-width to operate the thing. Its been there for a year or so, it seems, but turning it on did not seem to be a priority, even to save lives.
Washington Examiner: Speed Control Installed, But Not Turned On.
Greg Elmassian said:
Hmm… the train was apparently going about 70 mph 65 seconds before the turn, then accelerated to 106/107…
The engineer stated he tried to slow the train down for the turn… (what was he asleep?), then something about searching his bag afterwards to call 911.
Now he has no memory of the accident at all, because he had a concussion… (and a lawyer, is that related?).
Oh well…
News reports say that he has been tweeting about Engineer schedules and crew fatigue. If he did fall asleep, what was his sked like for the past two weeks?
Naval Air Training and Operating Procedures Standardization (NATOPS), the Navy Instruction that gives guidance for all things flight related says this:
88.3.2.1.1
CCrew Rest for Flight Crew and Flight Support Personnel
Crew rest is the non-duty time before a flight duty period begins. Crew rest
includes free time for meals, transportation and rest and must include an
opportunity for 8 hours of uninterrupted sleep time for every 24-hour period.
Crew rest does not begin until after termination of official duties and is
required prior to reporting for preflight preparations. Flight crew should
not be scheduled for continuous alert and/or flight duty (required awake) in
excess of 18 hours. If it becomes necessary to exceed the 18-hour rule, 15
hours of continuous off-duty time shall be provided prior to scheduling the
member for any flight duties. Flight and ground support personnel schedules
shall be made with due consideration for watch standing, collateral duties,
training, and off-duty activities. Crew rest can be reduced to less than 12
hours in order to maintain a 24-hour work/rest schedule, but a shortened crew
rest period (for example to maintain circadian rhythm) must always include an
opportunity for 8-hours of uninterrupted sleep.
NATOPS goes on to say in a Note:
As the time continuously awake duty time exceeds 16
hours, performance efficiency begins to drop. After
18 hours, performance efficiency rapidly declines to
75 percent of effectiveness or less. The loss of
effectiveness is manifested by lapses in attention,
increased reaction time, slowed information
processing, decreased vigilance, and increased error
frequency. Accident rates for just about every type
of human activity increase after 18 hours of
wakefulness, particularly during the night
“circadian trough” when sleep would normally occur.
Railroads would be well advised to review and adopt this section.
You can find this information and more on page 8-15 of the NATOPS Manual. OPNAVINST 3710.7U
