Yes this is referred to as the alerter system. I'm not sure if the ACS-64 has an alerter system, but I thought alerter were mandated in all new locomotives in the US. What makes this case truly interesting is the fact of several things: There was no communication between engineer and dispatch about an object hitting the train as reported by Sumwalt of the NTSB. There was no communication really between him and dispatch leading up to the accident. SEPTA engineer does not recall the conversation that engineer of train 188 and him had about an object striking their trains. Even better, somebody had to be alert and understand what the alerter system would do if it was not pressed. This case seems to be getting more interesting by the second. Next question is, why such did the dispatching terminal not see this train traveling to fast and alert engineer? I assume somebody monitoring the Amtrak NEC system would have seen this train was traveling more than twice the speed limit and would have attempted to contact said engineer of this train. Why was no such action taken here? Why was no such attempts to even make a status update done for this train? I think if somebody did, then they could have seen that potentially something out of the ordinary has occurred and action needs to be taken right then. I'm more interested how exactly the first line of defense, the alerter system was not triggered and if truly dispatch made attempts to contact this train. Somebody in several departments have a lot of explaining to do. This case is actually just beginning.
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Amtrak Train Crashes In Philly
- Thread starter watemple
- Start date
MeowRailroad
CKRail
This has gotten so confusing, it is maybe a mix of a lot of things.
I was attempting to make a harmless joke but I didn't realize it would be offensive. Sorry.
I was attempting to make a harmless joke but I didn't realize it would be offensive. Sorry.
Last edited:
This has gotten so confusing, it is maybe a mix of a lot of things.
Maybe it is ancient aliens.
MeowRailroad, With every respect to your posting, please remember that eight people died in this incident and over one hundred injured with many of those injuries life changing. Therefore, please post with regard to those circumstances, again with every respect.
Bill
Last edited:
cascaderailroad
New member
Locking the barn door, after the horse is stolen
Amtrak had installed an automatic braking system 24 years earlier on the southbound side of the curve and at several other tight curves on the Northeast Corridor, to automatically slow speeding trains if the engineer didn't.
Amtrak president and CEO Joseph Boardman has hit back saying that the lack of automatic-braking circuitry on the northbound side of the Frankford curve was based on Amtrak's assumption that trains wouldn't enter the curve at more than the 80 m.p.h. maximum.
"The notion that an engineer might actually accelerate into the northbound curve was not a circumstance we anticipated, and thus we didn't mitigate for it," Boardman told a congressional hearing. "It was a reasonable decision reached by reasonable experts under reasonable circumstances."
Only after the Philadelphia derailment did Amtrak quickly install automatic-braking circuitry on the northbound side of the Frankford Junction curve, which would have prevented the fatal derailment.
Amtrak had installed an automatic braking system 24 years earlier on the southbound side of the curve and at several other tight curves on the Northeast Corridor, to automatically slow speeding trains if the engineer didn't.
Amtrak president and CEO Joseph Boardman has hit back saying that the lack of automatic-braking circuitry on the northbound side of the Frankford curve was based on Amtrak's assumption that trains wouldn't enter the curve at more than the 80 m.p.h. maximum.
"The notion that an engineer might actually accelerate into the northbound curve was not a circumstance we anticipated, and thus we didn't mitigate for it," Boardman told a congressional hearing. "It was a reasonable decision reached by reasonable experts under reasonable circumstances."
Only after the Philadelphia derailment did Amtrak quickly install automatic-braking circuitry on the northbound side of the Frankford Junction curve, which would have prevented the fatal derailment.
To bad the good Ole Pennsy had Auto Breaking Mechanisms on All 4 track..... It was only after Amtrak "inherited" said tracks that they removed the 2 eastern most track mechanisms.
That's because they "modernized the system". It's like a lot of things I've noticed as I've gotten older. Sometimes there are systems in place, as antiquated or out-of-date as they appear, which worked fine for decades or maybe a century before. So why improve them if they're working fine?
John
Well John I guess some would call it progress. But if you ask me the money should go to other places on the NEC, Particularly any part in New Jersey, and the Hudson and East River Tunnels.... Zoo should be expanded, the Portal Bridge on the north of Harrison needs replaced as do the Dock Bridges at the North end of Newark. We're going to have a big problem in 20 years.
Well John I guess some would call it progress. But if you ask me the money should go to other places on the NEC, Particularly any part in New Jersey, and the Hudson and East River Tunnels.... Zoo should be expanded, the Portal Bridge on the north of Harrison needs replaced as do the Dock Bridges at the North end of Newark. We're going to have a big problem in 20 years.
I suppose this is progress... I agree more money should be spent, but there are those that look at the rail system as a bad relation who only gets a few pennies when they come begging. In general our who transportation infrastructure is a mess, but that's another story which we could preach to a choir about.
owenamiller
Member
Thats the problem with the new locomotives. TWO ACCIDENTS ONE MONTH AFTER REPLACING THE AEM-7 WHICh ONLY HAD ONE ACCIDENT 8 YEARS AFTER ITS RELEASE! REBUILD THE TOASTERS! REBUILD THE AEM-7's!
cascaderailroad
New member
8 were killed and over 200 injured, 11 critically ... and the engineer will not face involuntary manslaughter criminal charges (recklessly and negligently causing the deaths) ... as the news reported today, because he had no premeditory intent on committing a crime, by intentionally speeding, accidentally, on purpose
If I were tired, exhausted, flustered, confused, rushing to an appointment, and was unintentionaly speeding in a car, and crashed, killing pedestrians ... I would face involuntary/voluntary manslaughter charges
Any train traveling at 102 mph around that 50 mph northbound curve would have derailed
If I were tired, exhausted, flustered, confused, rushing to an appointment, and was unintentionaly speeding in a car, and crashed, killing pedestrians ... I would face involuntary/voluntary manslaughter charges
Any train traveling at 102 mph around that 50 mph northbound curve would have derailed
Last edited:
Thats the problem with the new locomotives. TWO ACCIDENTS ONE MONTH AFTER REPLACING THE AEM-7 WHICh ONLY HAD ONE ACCIDENT 8 YEARS AFTER ITS RELEASE! REBUILD THE TOASTERS! REBUILD THE AEM-7's!
Neither crash had anything to do with the locomotive. An AEM7 would have crashed in both circumstances. The Philly crash was because (as Cascade above mentioned, as well as many others) due to speed. 102 in a 50mph corner, you try doing that in your car, then remember that a train is much bigger & much heavier! The second crash was due to the engine running into a TLB, again using an AEM7 instead isn't going to change the outcome of that even; in fact I'd hazard a guess that the ACS-64 came out better in that crash then an AEM7 would.
In fact very few crashes out there on the rails are due to a problem with the locomotive, in the vast majority of cases it's due to external interference, or driver error. External factors are hard to prevent against, but driver error is more preventable, hence the push for Positive Train Control (PTC). The AEM7s didn't have PTC & would require fairly extensive overhauls to add them in, whereas the Sprinters have PTC systems (I believe the Hippos are set up to receive PTC, but don't have it)
peter
Hi everybody
As i recall there were many extenuating circumstances surrounding this incident not least being that no comprehensive train protection system was in operation either on the track or train at the time of the accident. Therefore in the foregoing, it may well have been that both the above bodies came to the belief that Amtrak and the governing rail authorities held an equal responsibility for this incident as did the the driver.
In regard to fatigue and stress etc being brought into the equation when drawing up conclusions to the cause of industrial accidents, then any investigation team is always under instruction to fully consider how such matters often being experienced outside the workplace may have contributed to the incident. In the foregoing it is very often the fact that matters taking place outside the workplace brings forward human failings in those places of work.
I like others were highly critical of “what appeared to be this drivers actions” at the time of the incident. However, the full investigation report has been brought forward and judgment given on that report. Therefore (and as stated), we should all respect that judegment, for that is the only place where all the full facts are brought together for practised and experienced consideration by those charged with the duty.
Bill
8 were killed and over 200 injured, 11 critically ... and the engineer will not face involuntary manslaughter criminal charges (recklessly and negligently causing the deaths) ... as the news reported today, because he had no premeditory intent on committing a crime, by intentionally speeding, accidentally, on purpose
I can see how cascaderailroad and perhaps others may feel that the drivers (engineer) punishment would appear to be “somewhat light” in view of the catastrophic outcome of this incident. However, we all should and must respect the report of the investigation team and prosecution authorities in matters such as these, as they are the only bodies who compile all the facts and then make judgement on that full case laid out before them.If I were tired, exhausted, flustered, confused, rushing to an appointment, and was unintentionaly speeding in a car, and crashed, killing pedestrians ... I would face involuntary/voluntary manslaughter charges
Any train traveling at 102 mph around that 50 mph northbound curve would have derailed
As i recall there were many extenuating circumstances surrounding this incident not least being that no comprehensive train protection system was in operation either on the track or train at the time of the accident. Therefore in the foregoing, it may well have been that both the above bodies came to the belief that Amtrak and the governing rail authorities held an equal responsibility for this incident as did the the driver.
In regard to fatigue and stress etc being brought into the equation when drawing up conclusions to the cause of industrial accidents, then any investigation team is always under instruction to fully consider how such matters often being experienced outside the workplace may have contributed to the incident. In the foregoing it is very often the fact that matters taking place outside the workplace brings forward human failings in those places of work.
I like others were highly critical of “what appeared to be this drivers actions” at the time of the incident. However, the full investigation report has been brought forward and judgment given on that report. Therefore (and as stated), we should all respect that judegment, for that is the only place where all the full facts are brought together for practised and experienced consideration by those charged with the duty.
Bill
Last edited:
cascaderailroad
New member
As an engineer job is is to mandatory know by heart, the entire route, he should have known from previously driving the route that a 50 mph curve was upcoming, in Frankford junction ... instead he left Phila going a full 102 mph to NYC, hell bent on making up time lost, and like Casey Jones, made a human fatal error, which is involuntary manslaughter. Manual control of a locomotive is mandatory, and engineers relying on AI PTC control is just negligent. No doubt he will face 8 charges of civil court for negligent homicide ... which he won't be able to pay the fines to the 8 families, of many millions ... even if he did drive a train anymore ... no doubt he is now making minimum wage in a low paying entry level job like McDonalds
instead he left Phila going a full 102 mph to NYC, hell bent on making up time lost
We don't actually know this & may never know that. Yes he was speeding, but we don't know if a) he was aware he was speeding and b) why he was speeding.
peter
Hi Everybody.
If in our working lives a person makes a mistake in a company's accounts office, the above consequences may mean lost time, lost revenue or a lost customer. However, if a mistake is made by the driver of a vehicle (especially a heavy passenger carrying vehicle) those consequences can involve multiple loss of life or multiple life changing injuries.
In the foregoing both persons have made a mistake, but only the vehicle driver is likely to find himself/herself brought before the courts and have severe penalties imposed against them. Therefore, it is the duty of the employer of a heavy or passenger carrying vehicle to provide the best protection possible so as to guard against the possibility of the employee making a grave error while driving the vehicle.
In the above, the technology was available to have prevented the incident under discussion from happening even when the driver carried out the actions he did. However, it had been decided by the authoritative powers both within the company and within the rail regulation enforcement that this technology was not immediately necessary, was therefore not fitted, and the incident occurred.
I believe that if any person considers the above fully they will conclude that the action (or lack of it) by the drivers employer (Amtrak) and the rail regulatory authorities was grossly unfair to the employee(s) and that they had a large degree of responsibility for the accident that occurred. The foregoing was in all probability the reason why the accident investigation team and prosecuting authorities have decided not to bring forward maximum penalty charges against the driver on this occasion.
Bill
Cascaderailroad, i believe we can all agree that the driver of the train under discussion did receive full training so as to have absolute knowledge of the route he was driving when the incident occurred. However, we all make mistakes and misjudgements throughout our lives which often incur consequences.As an engineer job is is to mandatory know by heart, the entire route, he should have known from previously driving the route that a 50 mph curve was upcoming, in Frankford junction.
If in our working lives a person makes a mistake in a company's accounts office, the above consequences may mean lost time, lost revenue or a lost customer. However, if a mistake is made by the driver of a vehicle (especially a heavy passenger carrying vehicle) those consequences can involve multiple loss of life or multiple life changing injuries.
In the foregoing both persons have made a mistake, but only the vehicle driver is likely to find himself/herself brought before the courts and have severe penalties imposed against them. Therefore, it is the duty of the employer of a heavy or passenger carrying vehicle to provide the best protection possible so as to guard against the possibility of the employee making a grave error while driving the vehicle.
In the above, the technology was available to have prevented the incident under discussion from happening even when the driver carried out the actions he did. However, it had been decided by the authoritative powers both within the company and within the rail regulation enforcement that this technology was not immediately necessary, was therefore not fitted, and the incident occurred.
I believe that if any person considers the above fully they will conclude that the action (or lack of it) by the drivers employer (Amtrak) and the rail regulatory authorities was grossly unfair to the employee(s) and that they had a large degree of responsibility for the accident that occurred. The foregoing was in all probability the reason why the accident investigation team and prosecuting authorities have decided not to bring forward maximum penalty charges against the driver on this occasion.
Bill
Last edited:
cascaderailroad
New member
Engineers are subject to the same prosecution as anyone else ... A cop can clock a train with a radar gun, and if speeding, the train can be stopped, and a speeding ticket issued to the engineer ... In this case, I guess not ... he seems exempt because AI PTC was not installed on that curve ... lucky him ... he only got fired, and is not responsible for 8 deaths
Ricky Gates went to MD State prison, for years, for the 1987 Gunpowder Falls collision, that killed 16
Ricky Gates went to MD State prison, for years, for the 1987 Gunpowder Falls collision, that killed 16
Last edited:
HI cascaderailroad and everybody
Cascaderailroad, i can understand why yourself and others may feel deep unease in regard to the penalties (or lack of) imposed on the driver of the train involved in the Amtrak philadelphia accident. Indeed I stated in a previous posting on this thread that “the book should be thrown at this driver” if the allegations of excessive speed on the curve are upheld.
In the above, those allegations have now been proven, but it has also been proven that a train protection system widely used and available worldwide had not been fitted to either train or track at the point where the incident occurred. In not providing that system the employer failed under legislation in their duty of care to the driver of the train and the passengers traveling on it.
I have posed below the relevant section of the UK Health & Safety at Work Act but the legislation i believe is very similar in the United States and a large number of other developed countries.
Section of act begins here:-
General duties of employers to their employees.
(1)It shall be the duty of every employer to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare at work of all his employees.
(2) Without prejudice to the generality of an employer’s duty under the preceding subsection, the matters to which that duty extends include in particular
(a) the provision and maintenance of plant and systems of work that are, so far as is reasonably practicable, safe and without risks to health
Section of act ends.
It can be seen from the above that the practical and reasonable provision of plant that would prevent an incident should any driver make an error was not made available to Amtrak's employees at that point on the line. Therefore it was in all likelihood the reason why the accident investigation team and prosecuting authorities decided not to proceed with the full heavy charges that many obviously feel should have been brought forward.
In regard to Ricky Gates who went to MD State prison, for four years, for the 1987 Gunpowder Falls collision, that killed 16, obviously the train protection systems so widely in use now were not available at that time. Along with the foregoing and from what i read, the driver ran a red light and then comprehensively failed a marijuana drug test following the incident.
Bill.
Cascaderailroad, i can understand why yourself and others may feel deep unease in regard to the penalties (or lack of) imposed on the driver of the train involved in the Amtrak philadelphia accident. Indeed I stated in a previous posting on this thread that “the book should be thrown at this driver” if the allegations of excessive speed on the curve are upheld.
In the above, those allegations have now been proven, but it has also been proven that a train protection system widely used and available worldwide had not been fitted to either train or track at the point where the incident occurred. In not providing that system the employer failed under legislation in their duty of care to the driver of the train and the passengers traveling on it.
I have posed below the relevant section of the UK Health & Safety at Work Act but the legislation i believe is very similar in the United States and a large number of other developed countries.
Section of act begins here:-
General duties of employers to their employees.
(1)It shall be the duty of every employer to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare at work of all his employees.
(2) Without prejudice to the generality of an employer’s duty under the preceding subsection, the matters to which that duty extends include in particular
(a) the provision and maintenance of plant and systems of work that are, so far as is reasonably practicable, safe and without risks to health
Section of act ends.
It can be seen from the above that the practical and reasonable provision of plant that would prevent an incident should any driver make an error was not made available to Amtrak's employees at that point on the line. Therefore it was in all likelihood the reason why the accident investigation team and prosecuting authorities decided not to proceed with the full heavy charges that many obviously feel should have been brought forward.
In regard to Ricky Gates who went to MD State prison, for four years, for the 1987 Gunpowder Falls collision, that killed 16, obviously the train protection systems so widely in use now were not available at that time. Along with the foregoing and from what i read, the driver ran a red light and then comprehensively failed a marijuana drug test following the incident.
Bill.
Last edited:
cascaderailroad
New member
Finally some prosecution in a case ... Probably will serve 4-10 years in State Prison for 8 deaths ... Eligible for parole after 48 months, for the remainder of 6 more years
Hey Cascade, maybe you should serve instead. At least we wouldnt have to read your posts anymore then.
Ah, and you never thought you are somewhere else than you actually were when driving at night ? You do know how many miles and similar looking places the NEC has, and at night it is even harder to see them from a moving train to determine your position.
Yes Sir, since you were in the cab with him, you for sure can say that. God can we go even lower.... ?
That you probably know from your year long experience as a driver and in other rail related jobs. Ha Ha
Ah no fear, he wont take your job away...
Bostian, well he was one of the best Amtrak engineers out there afaik and very concerned about the low safety regarding railroad systems in various parts of the system. He wrote a lot about that in train forums before that accident happened. They all knew since long ago that such things would happen, but they just did not care. The only one that should be prosecuted is Amtrak, for not even having simple distant speed signals in place there in the braking distance to the curve and a system to stop the train if the engineer does not acknowledge it in any way (electronically supervised speed curve). And dont start with ACSES guys, a lot more simple systems that can do this are in use since 1960 in other countries and they do NOT cost that much! They always install those speed boards along such curves i heard - AFTER an accident happened there. Also some kind of way to save money, pretty deadly one.
We are all humans, and we all fail sometimes, especially when driving for many hours or when we think we could handle situations without making errors because we do so since a few years.
Yes, it was Bostian, but it could have been anyone out there. That has nothing to do with beeing trained or doing your job well, it happens to anyone at some point. But normally, we got a lot of luck and no one finds out because there is no crash or derailment. Or the safety systems jump in. Thats what they are for after all - to think a human can work in such a job for years without doing anything wrong is hilarious. That poor guy already has to live with the fact that he is responsible for the death of people and that he will may never again in his life drive a train - damn he was just a guy like us! He loved trains, he took pictures of them and it was his dream to work with them. And yes, he was VERY good at doing so!
Just have a little bit more respect and THINK before you write next time - and especially if you have no idea how to operate a train, operating rules and the person + cause of the accident. Dont judge people doing a job you have no clue about. And no, driving computer trains with a keyboard does not count. You aren't free of errors too, after all
Greetings,
Felix
As an engineer job is is to mandatory know by heart, the entire route, he should have known from previously driving the route that a 50 mph curve was upcoming, in Frankford junction ...
Ah, and you never thought you are somewhere else than you actually were when driving at night ? You do know how many miles and similar looking places the NEC has, and at night it is even harder to see them from a moving train to determine your position.
instead he left Phila going a full 102 mph to NYC, hell bent on making up time lost
Yes Sir, since you were in the cab with him, you for sure can say that. God can we go even lower.... ?
Manual control of a locomotive is mandatory, and engineers relying on AI PTC control is just negligent
That you probably know from your year long experience as a driver and in other rail related jobs. Ha Ha
no doubt he is now making minimum wage in a low paying entry level job like McDonalds
Ah no fear, he wont take your job away...
Bostian, well he was one of the best Amtrak engineers out there afaik and very concerned about the low safety regarding railroad systems in various parts of the system. He wrote a lot about that in train forums before that accident happened. They all knew since long ago that such things would happen, but they just did not care. The only one that should be prosecuted is Amtrak, for not even having simple distant speed signals in place there in the braking distance to the curve and a system to stop the train if the engineer does not acknowledge it in any way (electronically supervised speed curve). And dont start with ACSES guys, a lot more simple systems that can do this are in use since 1960 in other countries and they do NOT cost that much! They always install those speed boards along such curves i heard - AFTER an accident happened there. Also some kind of way to save money, pretty deadly one.
We are all humans, and we all fail sometimes, especially when driving for many hours or when we think we could handle situations without making errors because we do so since a few years.
Yes, it was Bostian, but it could have been anyone out there. That has nothing to do with beeing trained or doing your job well, it happens to anyone at some point. But normally, we got a lot of luck and no one finds out because there is no crash or derailment. Or the safety systems jump in. Thats what they are for after all - to think a human can work in such a job for years without doing anything wrong is hilarious. That poor guy already has to live with the fact that he is responsible for the death of people and that he will may never again in his life drive a train - damn he was just a guy like us! He loved trains, he took pictures of them and it was his dream to work with them. And yes, he was VERY good at doing so!
Just have a little bit more respect and THINK before you write next time - and especially if you have no idea how to operate a train, operating rules and the person + cause of the accident. Dont judge people doing a job you have no clue about. And no, driving computer trains with a keyboard does not count. You aren't free of errors too, after all
Greetings,
Felix
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Replies
- 19
- Views
- 887
- Replies
- 3
- Views
- 240
- Replies
- 3
- Views
- 500
- Replies
- 2
- Views
- 638