Amtrak Train Derails on Highway Bridge in Washington State

By example to the above, the conductor may have informed the trade union lawyers or similar that the only duty he/she carried out prior to the incident occurring was to have checked passengers tickets and opened and closed the train doors. In that situation any lawyer (a solicitor in the UK) will lodge a preliminary damage and loss claim against the conductors employers (Amtrak) under the above legislation.

The conductor in question isn't really part of the crew. He was in the cab with the engineer learning the route.

peter
 
Hi Everybody.
The conductor in question isn't really part of the crew. He was in the cab with the engineer learning the route.
peter

Peter, I had read that the conductor was in the cab of the locomotive under training. However, I did not wish to reference that in my posting at #80 of this thread for two reasons. In the first the reports on this side of the pond in regard to the incident have largely come from newspapers who all to often experience gives anyone the knowledge not to rely on.

The second reason was that detailing the conductor was situated in the cab at the time of the incident may well have provided fuel for further speculation in this thread of which I hope we can all agree there has been far to much of already.

Technically the trainee conductor may not have been an active member of the crew operating the train. However, he/she is an employee of Amtrak I believe and therefore would be covered under the United States industrial Safety Legislation and Amtrak’s liability insurance. Therefore, the conductor would be under legal obligation to give evidence/information to the accident investigation team and his/her employers while at the same time launching a prelimery personal injury and loss claim if he/she is stating that he/she had no active role in the cause of the incident.

I heard yesterday, that all 4 leading crew members in charge have "Lawyered Up", and have not been interviewed

Cascade, doubtless the train crew members have taken up their legal right to be represented in line with advise they in all probability have been given by their trade union (if they are members), Amtrak and those leading the accident investigation.

Bill
 
Very late to get into this (I was away out of the country), so by now someone must have found what went wrong. Here is my grain of salt: Since I am from Spain, I travelled in Talgos many times. It was well known that Talgo consists are to run in one direction only. During turn around at Barcelona or Madrid (Old times), they had to move the consist quite far to get in the right position. Pushing was done at a very reduced speed with someone at the rear in constant communication with the pushing switcher. As time went by, looks like Talgo system evolved and there was no need to do that. Hence a Talgo would arrive to Zurich and would return to Barcelona seemingly running opposite to the way it came. But in no way being pushed. Now, here in USA, we have had this train running between Portland and Vancouver BC for quite some time (correct me if I am wrong). And I have seen the videos of a real loco at one end and a dummy at the other, so one end is pushing and the other end is used for the driver, perhaps heating or just baggage. And the Talgos have not derailed even while being pushed. Of course, everything has a parameter-limit. What is a safe speed for pushing a Talgo?, Or it does not matter due to the improvements of this new generation? Not saying this accident was caused by pushing, but I have to mention another Talgo accident that happened time ago in North West Spain with many dead. At that time it was a real high speed train capable of doing 130 Mph easily. Always pulling. That accident was caused by a loco losing balance, due to excessive speed. But upon looking to the video of that accident, the loco that derails is located behind the real loco (??). How can this be? It so happens that some one had the brilliant idea of having very light cars, with a low center of gravity capable of taking curves at high speed (such as the cars on our Oregon accident), coupled to a very aerodynamic electric loco, and just behind it another loco with a large diesel engine! (that consist was capable to running on electrified lines and regular ones by action of the diesel). And so, that train, for the view of the videos, passed the curve even if it was really fast, and the cars also passed, but the diesel loco by function of the weight and high center of gravity, did not, and took everything with it killing too many. So, coming back to our accident, it is very strange, and many factors should be evaluated. I am glad the investigators did not find the engineer texting, as they did on the Northridge accident. That accident is also a source of heavy debate and I doubt on the findings of the commission. Blame the dead and everything will be fine... To summarize, Talgo consists run everyday in many places of the World and have a very high record of safety. Did you know that the first Talgo train ever made was made here in USA? (By ACF), and placed in service between Madrid and Barcelona running for many years without any problems. Interesting: It had a custom made loco, not these regular large locos they use nowadays here. Do some research and you will see.
 
The locomotive in the front was pulling the train.

The train derailed because it was going to fast around the corner.

The question is, why was it going to fast?

peter
 
Can you produce written evidence: That the rear loco was NOT pushing the consist, shoving it off the tracks ... and written evidence that the loco on the head end was indeed pulling the consist ?

The only fact I see: Is that the rear loco was the only vehicle that remained on the track, looking as if it was shoving the consist around the curve at high speed, being remote controlled from the front engines cab controls, speeding by operator negligence

I read that they were having problems with the consist, and could not get the "loco" started (was that the head end loco that could not be started) ?
 
Last edited:
1st off. There is very little actual written evidence of what happened currently available. Lots of speculation, and eyewitness reports (which are not all correct or reliable). The ONLY written evidence that we is fact is what is presented here in the NTSB Preliminary Report.

I'm moving this week & there is still a lot of packing to do (in fact, I'm getting off the computer after posting this0, so am not going to spend the time digging thru old posts to find you a quote. But I'll point you in the right direction. I got my information from this thread on Amtrak Unlimited, I don't recall exactly where your particular question was mentioned, and it's source as I read the thread as the news was released.

peter
 
So in other words he didn't know the route. Is this the way Amtrak work? No wonder the US has so many derailments.
 
The engineer of Amtrak Cascades 501, which derailed on Dec. 18, 2017 in DuPont, Wash., has told the National Transportation Safety Board that he does not recall seeing an approach sign with a speed restriction placed two miles before the 30-mph curve upon which the derailment occurred.

The 55-year-old engineer, whose name has not been released, didn’t initiate braking from track speeds approaching 80 mph until his train entered the curve, where it derailed on a bridge over Interstate 5, killing three and injuring 70, among them eight motorists on I-5, according to an NTSB investigation update released Jan. 25. The NTSB said the engineer was on his second southbound run on the newly opened Point Defiance Bypass. Both the engineer and a conductor undergoing training with him in the locomotive, a brand-new Siemens Charger diesel-electric, were among the injured. The conductor is among the victims who have filed lawsuits against Amtrak and others over the accident. NTSB officials said it will take up to two years to complete its investigation, and that the accounts from the train crew would be compared against locomotive cab video and other sources. Previously, the NTSB had disclosed that the crew wasn’t using smartphones or other electronic devices just before the accident, ruling out that type of distraction as a possible cause. The NTSB said the engineer and conductor could not be interviewed until the week of Jan. 22 due to their serious injuries. Both men, who prior to 501’s run had not worked together, told the NTSB they felt rested and alert at the beginning of the run and spoke little as the train got under way. The engineer told NTSB investigators he didn’t recall seeing the speed sign that warns of the approaching 30-mph speed restriction two miles before the curve. The sign was posted on the right-hand side of the right-of-way; the engineer’s position was on the right-hand side of the locomotive cab. The engineer also said he didn’t recall seeing a milepost marker near the speed sign that would indicate where the curve was in relation to the train’s position. When he saw the second 30 mph sign at the beginning of the curve, he initiated an emergency brake application, but by then it was too late to prevent a derailment. The conductor-in-training told the NTSB he spent most of his time during the run reviewing paperwork to help learn the territory. “Just prior to the derailment, the qualifying conductor said he looked down at his copies of the general track bulletins,” the NTSB update said. “He then heard the engineer say or mumble something. He then looked up and sensed that the train was becoming ‘airborne.’” After discussions with several older, experienced qualified locomotive engineers, it would appear that the level of locomotive engineer technical qualification training may have deteriorated, as outsourced, contracted training is replacing what older, experienced railroad hands used to provide. Is this a case of safety being too casually contracted-out to a low-cost vendor? It used to be that locomotive engineers memorized the details of their routes on which they qualified. They rarely needed ‘signs.’ As one experienced engineer reminded me, ‘All we needed were the signals of the next block ahead. We knew the territory and where we were at all times, even just by the feel of every jiggle or jostle in the track. We knew every break in the rail—switches, facing or trailing point; signals; signs; barking dogs—yes, even their location—and anything else to keep ourselves familiarized with the railroad. In 501’s wreck, where a higher service speed on the rebuilt Point Defiance Bypass route was the objective of a diverse sponsor group, the accident came down to a missed approach sign to the strategic, 50-mph speed reduction required well before the bridge curve. This is illogical. How could the engineer have been trained and then certified by anyone as being qualified without this as basic knowledge of his route? Is this the new standard of safety qualification?


 
Last edited:
Well, at least the locomotive destroyed was a disgusting SC-44 Charger.

Considering the state of US passenger rail, every dollar of investment lost is one too many and to top it off, Amtrak is taxpayer funded. Only the most infantile minds would view any sort of destruction as a good thing.
 
Well, at least the locomotive destroyed was a disgusting SC-44 Charger.

People said the same thing about the P42s.

The Chargers are sorely needed and look fine. I get that everyone is entitled to their own opinion but please remember that people died in this accident and many others were seriously hurt, including the engineer in that destroyed Charger.

Frankly, it's a testament to the design and robustness of the SC-44. Despite all that carnage, the engineer walked away. Seriously injured, but alive.
 
When he saw the second 30 mph sign at the beginning of the curve, "he initiated an emergency brake application", but by then it was too late to prevent a derailment.
In an earlier official press statement, it said that no braking whatsoever was applied by the engineer, and the emergency braking was automatically applied when trainline air hose connections separated during the crash
 
In an earlier official press statement, it said that no braking whatsoever was applied by the engineer, and the emergency braking was automatically applied when Trainline air hose connections separated during the crash

Cascaderailroad, obviously the investigation has moved on and as a result of the interview with the engineer along with other continued evidence gathering, new facts have come to light. In the foregoing, that is exactly why investigations are set up and what they serve.

Undoubtedly the investigation team will now proceed on to inquire as to why the speed restriction sign was not seen. In that they will seek to ascertain if the sign was obscured from vision in anyway, and if not why the engineer failed to see the sign and react.

In the above, normally any investigation will proceed to enquire into the drug and alcohol policy of the company and the competence of any random testing of critical staff as they commence a shift. Background enquiries will also be carried out to uncover whether the engineer had any personal relationship problems, financial problems or any undeclared medical issues. Indeed, the inquiries will seek to find any matter which may have caused the engineer to fail in his competence or concentration while carrying out his duties.

In all that is happening, only one thing is certain, life will not be good for this engineer in the coming months. However, I cannot but feel some sympathy with this person, for if a full train protection system had been installed this event would never have happened.

Bill
 
Last edited:
What exactly are the official facts ?

Or are the typographical errors, and miss-prints, and lies, and cover-ups, just beginning to come out ?
 
In all that is happening, only one thing is certain, life will not be good for this engineer in the coming months. However, I cannot but feel some sympathy with this person, for if a full train protection system had been installed this event would never have happened.
Bill
The engineer and conductor will never work for another railroad ever again, being "Blackballed" for "Negligent Involunatry Homicide"
 
Back
Top