AMTRAK Wreck - General Information

[jerrysimons]

Track speed prior to 50mph curve is reported to be 80mph. NTSB said the train accelerated 30mph to 102-106mph in 45-65 seconds before derailment in the curve. No doubt it derailed due to excessive speed but how did the train get going that fast? The acceleration is definitely doable with the light, short Amtrak trains. The time elapsed of acceleration is about the span of an alerter cycle. But if he feel asleep at cruising speed between alerter alarms it doesn't explain the drastic acceleration. Maybe he feel asleep after notching up the throttle input but that means he throttled up and then nodded off at about the exact time he should have started slowing down for the curve. It is such a massive instance of incompetence from a respected engineer that it is hardly believable it was an oversit or mistake. Given what his co-workers are saying about him, nothing makes sense if framed as negligence. A suicide attempt is more believable to me than an oversite.

[Mauser KAR98K]

That makes you wonder.

Still doesn't explain the jump to 100mph. Common sense would say to slow down after a strike like what is being described.

[TacticalSledgehammer]

Track speed prior to 50mph curve is reported to be 80mph. NTSB said the train accelerated 30mph to 102-106mph in 45-65 seconds before derailment in the curve. No doubt it derailed due to excessive speed but how did the train get going that fast? The acceleration is definitely doable with the light, short Amtrak trains. The time elapsed of acceleration is about the span of an alerter cycle. But if he feel asleep at cruising speed between alerter alarms it doesn't explain the drastic acceleration. Maybe he feel asleep after notching up the throttle input but that means he throttled up and then nodded off at about the exact time he should have started slowing down for the curve. It is such a massive instance of incompetence from a respected engineer that it is hardly believable it was an oversit or mistake. Given what his co-workers are saying about him, nothing makes sense if framed as negligence. A suicide attempt is more believable to me than an oversite.

I'm not sure what Amtrak's schedules are like but if it's anything like freight service, your sleep schedules are pretty jacked up. I don't think it was a suicide attempt was what his goal. It just seems like he could have ended it for himself in many more suicide successful senereos than this.
The fact the FBI is investigating leads me to wonder if he may have had an unexpected visitor enter cab. Or potentially he could have been shot at. I could see a gunshot becoming distracting for a few seconds while the shock wears off. I've been shot at before on board and it takes a few seconds for the oh-shit factor to go away.

[Mauser KAR98K]

Would the hit have broken his conscientration and he forgot where he was on the line and bumped up the speed?

[Averageman]

Would the hit have broken his conscientration and he forgot where he was on the line and bumped up the speed?

At that point the number of human or mechanical error possibilities are too many to count.
I would hate to awaken in the midst of a terrible wreck and have no idea how or why I killed so many people, don't know if I could live with that.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/16/us...507654903&_r=0

At a news conference on Friday, Robert L. Sumwalt, the safety board official who is leading the investigation, said an assistant conductor had reported that she believed she heard a radio transmission in which an engineer on a regional line said his train had been struck by a projectile and the engineer on the Amtrak train replied that his had been struck, too.
Mr. Sumwalt said that investigators had found a fist-size circular area of impact on the left side of the Amtrak train’s windshield and that they had asked the Federal Bureau of Investigation to analyze it. He said that the F.B.I. had been called in because it has the forensics expertise needed for the investigation, but that it had not yet begun its analysis.

[jerrysimons]

I'm not sure what Amtrak's schedules are like but if it's anything like freight service, your sleep schedules are pretty jacked up. I don't think it was a suicide attempt was what his goal. It just seems like he could have ended it for himself in many more suicide successful senereos than this.
The fact the FBI is investigating leads me to wonder if he may have had an unexpected visitor enter cab. Or potentially he could have been shot at. I could see a gunshot becoming distracting for a few seconds while the shock wears off. I've been shot at before on board and it takes a few seconds for the oh-shit factor to go away.

I am sure Amtrak crews are run into the ground just like freight, often committee service have these split duty schedules where 12hrs of service are split by a period of "rest" inbetween arrival and return trips.

Yeah I find a suiciede attempt hard to believe also, it is just more believable, IMO, than he forgot the curve was there and took off or that he simply feel asleep given the throttle controls. Those trains are fast being so small and light by he still would have had to "floor it" to take off like that from cruising speed. It just doesn't make sense how he ended up going so fast precisely when he should have been slowing down. The projectile development is interesting and may have distracted him enough to notch up the throttle instead of setting dynamic brakes, but dang, that differance is physically opposite control manipulation and is something almost second nature. Now I say that but the CSX incident the movie Unstoppable is based on, the moron set the throttle higher instead on the dynamic break before he jumped off the train attempting to throw the switch before getting back on. So I suppose it is possible when you are not honking straight but still 60seconds went by while the train was accelerating.

It is indeed a big mystery, and the kicker is the NTSB knows already! Those data recorders show what the throttle settings were in addition to everything else and it takes more like hours anylize it not days.

What is shocking to me is the difference between passenger and freight crew wise. Freight trains have two crew members in the lead engine, who are by federal regulation of duties, jointly responsible for the trains operation, having a speed cap of 70mph. Yet passenger trains, full of hundreds of people, with speeds up to 120mph, operating on the same tracks as freight in many areas, have just a lonely engineer up front with everyone's life in his hands while the jointly responsible conductor is just a fare collecter and crowd control in the back.

[jpmuscle]

What is shocking to me is the difference between passenger and freight crew wise. Freight trains have two crew members in the lead engine, who are by federal regulation of duties, jointly responsible for the trains operation, having a speed cap of 70mph. Yet passenger trains, full of hundreds of people, with speeds up to 120mph, operating on the same tracks as freight in many areas, have just a lonely engineer up front with everyone's life in his hands while the jointly responsible conductor is just a fare collecter and crowd control in the back.

So why has it come to be like that?

[Mauser KAR98K]

So why has it come to be like that?

I would wager the same as in the trucking industry: can't find qualified people willing to do the job.

[jerrysimons]

So why has it come to be like that?

Mostly due to carriers reducing operating costs of labor coupled with, in some instances, technological advances. Passenger service does require a crew member or two to oversee the safety of the passengers and collect fares from walk on riders but to that end the conductor still has to comply with FRA (federal railroad administration) duty requirements that were written as though he were riding in the cab with the engineer. Chiefly the conductor's job is ensuring signal and speed compliance as well as communication and coordination with dispatchers and other trains. The conductor is basically in charge of the train, his job is quite literally to ensure the engineer meets the requirements of his job, in addition to performing whatever ground work is necessary along a trip like inspecting brake systems, applying hand brakes, switching cars, connecting air hoses, train makeup compliance, etc. Engineers get all the attention but the head Conductor on Amtrak 188 is in as much trouble as the engineer is at this point. The issue with passenger service is that the conductor is mostly preoccupied with his additional duties related to overseeing the passengers and really only artificially complies with the duties related to train operation. In passenger service, since the elimination of the "fireman" position in the 70s-80s, the engineer is really up there by himself and the conductor is in the back with the passengers. Freight service does not have these passenger duties and the conductor is up front with the engineer together ensuring train is operated safely according to territory requirements.

Carriers are seeking to eliminate the conductor position on freight trains and replace his job with PTC (positive train control) which is an integrated computer system in which train computers communicate with the track signal system and GPS satellites to know where they are operating and failsafe operate the train in compliance if the engineer fails to manually do so. The ground work required along a trip would in theory be preformed by roving conductors responsible for assisting all trains within given area. PTC is one step toward automated trains driving themselves...
Passenger aircraft can fly themselves and can even land under autopilot but still FAA mandates two pilots on board the plane at all times. I think it is a bad idea to eliminate the second crew member off of trains, which is part of why I brought up how the engineer is basically alone in passenger trains. A second pair of eyes knowing what was going on in the engine could/should have prevented the Amtrak 188 derailment. Carriers are happy to keep the conductor preoccupied with passengers as long as they can artificially comply with operation requirements because labor is the second highest cost behind fuel and hiring additional qualified crew members making 6 figures with benefits is too expensive. Carriers are focused on implementing technology that is supposedly fool proof. In the mean time passenger trains are essentially operated by one man doing everything, with the idea that the engineer is going to get compliance oversight once PTC is finally implemented.

[jpmuscle]

Gotcha. Thanks for the insight