Northeast Regional 188 - Accident In Philadelphia

I note that point 3 of the staff recommendations posted by nomis states that the engineer's attention was likely "diverted," and Mr. Norman's citation from the WSJ mentions "radio transmissions." However, some members of the media appear to have introduced the term "radio chatter," which I'm sure will give many people entirely the wrong idea. The "chatter" referred to was engineers reporting that their trains were being rocked; that's not chatter in anyone's definition, and I believe engineers are required to report anything they see that shouldn't be happening. It will be unfortunate if the idea of "chatter" becomes lodged in the public mind, but I don't suppose anything can be done about it any more than about other misuse of rail terminology by the media.

This is a split decision, and one that shows the importance of the best possible people, training, and safety equipment.
"The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) voted 3-1 to determine the probable cause of the May 12, 2015 Amtrak 188 derailment in Philadelphia to be the locomotive engineer's loss of situational awareness....The NTSB Vice Chairman Bella Dinh-Zarr was the lone vote against the probable cause wording. She had introduced an amendment that would have named a lack of a PTC system as the probable cause instead of contributing to it. However, other board members argued that a train's locomotive engineer was solely responsible for the safe operation of a train and PTC was intended as a back up safety system should an engineer falter in that responsibility." http://arr.as/1WD2a7B" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Saying this accident was "caused by the lack of PTC" is absurd on her part. That would be like saying when I run a red light in my car because I'm busy texting, that the accident was caused by my cell phone, or caused by the lack of automatic braking on my car. That's a politically motivated statement that has no business in the NTSB.

MCL1981 wrote:That's a politically motivated statement that has no business in the NTSB.

I disagree. I presume no political intent on the part of the NTSB. Therefore I interpret the dissent as indicating that the lack of PTC permitted an operating condition to exist from which it was impossible for the engineer to recover from once they had lost situational awareness in a low visibility situation. This makes for an interesting case of PTC as the "electronic fireman" in the cab who can help assist the engineer in maintaining situational awareness. I think in this particular case the idea that PTC was a causal factor carries some weight, but not enough to sway the whole Board. The real point that the dissent is making is that simple (and repeatable) human error shouldn't have such catastrophic consequences and that PTC would clearly have prevented this.

Agreed. I don't read that as political at all. Sounds like a professional difference of opinion. She is right in that had there been PTC in place this probably wouldn't have happened.

But, to be fair, I don't know this person and have no idea if she intended it to be a political jab of some kind. I would imagine if it were intended as a political statement, given the current nature of American discourse, that her objection would have been much more vocal, more strongly stated, and she'd probably be booked on MSNBC, Fox, and CNN.

Here's a link to an article about PTC. http://www.northjersey.com/news/a-year- ... -1.1587818" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

MCL1981 wrote:Saying this accident was "caused by the lack of PTC" is absurd on her part. That would be like saying when I run a red light in my car because I'm busy texting, that the accident was caused by my cell phone, or caused by the lack of automatic braking on my car. That's a politically motivated statement that has no business in the NTSB.

I hope the mods don't suspend me for saying this, but ...

Blaming the accident on the Engineer alone is only a small part of the truth and small part of the cause of the accident. He was "distracted" by the radio transmissions from a SEPTA train that was hit by some kind of object. (The press makes it sound like the engineer was listening to a radio that he shouldn't have been paying attention to.) I can understand his interest in that transmission in that he was going to go through the same area that the SEPTA train got hit by the object, AND that there was some concern that someone had needed medical attention showing that this was not just a small stone that hit the window.

I can easily see how one could be distracted by a radio transmission like that, having been in the cab of an E60 (pre Ghetto Grates) when we got hit by a brick that almost killed the engineer (back in the '70s). Even had I not had that terrible experience, I would have paid close attention to that radio transmission for MY OWN SAFETY.

YES, PTC would have prevented this accident, and YES the Engineer SHOULD have known where he was at all times. That ALL would have happened in a PERFECT WORLD, but we DO NOT live in a perfect world. People make mistakes, and I have also learned from personal experience that the more that we rely on technology, the more lax we become in our situational awareness.

MCL1981 wrote:Saying this accident was "caused by the lack of PTC" is absurd on her part. That would be like saying when I run a red light in my car because I'm busy texting, that the accident was caused by my cell phone, or caused by the lack of automatic braking on my car.

There is a difference. First, the engineer was not texting. The distraction that he suffered was part of his job, not something that was against the rules and not part of his job. As part of his job he was asked to do many things at the same time. Remembering where he was and slowing the train for the curve was forgotten.

PTC would have stepped in and reminded him to slow down - and (just like the current system enabled after the accident) enforce a slower speed. Automatic braking is not required on your car. It is required as part of PTC. The accident happened before the PTC deadline (and extension) but it is fair to say that a working automatic train control would have prevented this accident. Not having PTC led to a fatal incident.

Here is NBC Nightly News' report regarding the NTSB Final Report:

http://www.nbcnews.com/nightly-news/vid ... 7537219507" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I trust it is noted the absence of the term "chatter"; I further trust it is noted that at the very end of the report, a matter that the moderators have asked us not to discuss is broached.

Everyone:

Who threw the rock?

After reading n2cbo's post - one of the best posted here today - and noticing this Philadelphia Inquirer article title - I am convinced that vandalism is a cause of this accident directly resulting from trains either getting rocked or shot at - after learning of the SEPTA and Acela trains that were involved in these incidents that night. I would not be at all surprised if there were other trains that were getting rocked but not reporting any significant damage or any injuries on board.

There may have been damage to #901 or any of the cars on that train that ended up getting "erased" in the wreck that could never be found and Engineer Bostian may have been in the process of "taking cover" as a result of the train being rocked or shot at by these same vandals losing track of his exact whereabouts in the process.

http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/in-t ... -rock.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

As far as I am concerned these vandals are either directly or indirectly responsible for the deaths of eight people that night...MACTRAXX

n2cbo wrote:

MCL1981 wrote:Saying this accident was "caused by the lack of PTC" is absurd on her part. That would be like saying when I run a red light in my car because I'm busy texting, that the accident was caused by my cell phone, or caused by the lack of automatic braking on my car. That's a politically motivated statement that has no business in the NTSB.

I hope the mods don't suspend me for saying this, but ...

Blaming the accident on the Engineer alone is only a small part of the truth and small part of the cause of the accident. He was "distracted" by the radio transmissions from a SEPTA train that was hit by some kind of object. (The press makes it sound like the engineer was listening to a radio that he shouldn't have been paying attention to.) I can understand his interest in that transmission in that he was going to go through the same area that the SEPTA train got hit by the object, AND that there was some concern that someone had needed medical attention showing that this was not just a small stone that hit the window.

I can easily see how one could be distracted by a radio transmission like that, having been in the cab of an E60 (pre Ghetto Grates) when we got hit by a brick that almost killed the engineer (back in the '70s). Even had I not had that terrible experience, I would have paid close attention to that radio transmission for MY OWN SAFETY.

YES, PTC would have prevented this accident, and YES the Engineer SHOULD have known where he was at all times. That ALL would have happened in a PERFECT WORLD, but we DO NOT live in a perfect world. People make mistakes, and I have also learned from personal experience that the more that we rely on technology, the more lax we become in our situational awareness.

Youre in the clear.

Great job guys, very nice discussion thus far. Lets keep it this way.

MACTRAXX wrote:Everyone:

Who threw the rock?

That's the real question that should of been asked, because this started the entire accident.

We can all agree, PTC would have mitigated this, but PTC was late in coming due to Congressional delay.

The cause really goes all the way back to some kid throwing a rock, causing a SEPTA train to stop and the radio to wail warning of the rocking. That in turn cascaded into the larger accident, and the death of four people. Everything else covered was mitigation factors. There's really not much to debate here.

What is the training advice for such a situation, where one is not sure of location, or circumstances?. I would have thought it would be to slow down , or stop. I guess because of the Engineers memory loss , we don't know wether he was confused , or was sure he was in an area where 100 mph was the top speed.

By now the SEPTA "Rocking" incident is buried way deep in a file cabinet at SEPTA PD or Phila PD,
a "cold case" that might never be solved.

MACTRAXX wrote:Who threw the rock?

Here is a link to the NTSB website where one can read the opening and closing statements and an abstract that includes the 11 recommendations being made by the NTSB.
http://www.ntsb.gov/news/events/Pages/2 ... k-BMG.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Note that there are no "rock" related recommendations. Sticking with the facts and conclusions as presented by the NTSB, their focus is on the actions of the railroads and first responders and the construction of the cars. And even though the majority voted against making the lack of PTC the primary cause, it is obvious from the immediate response to this accident and the statements made Tuesday that the NTSB believes PTC could have prevented this accident.

As Chairman Christopher A. Hart put it in his closing statement (emphasis added):

Unless PTC is implemented soon, I’m very concerned that we’re going to be back in this room again, hearing investigators detail how technology that we have recommended for more than 45 years could have prevented yet another fatal rail accident.

As I mentioned in my opening statement, the real deadline for PTC implementation is not 2018, but the next PTC-preventable accident. Because we do not know when that might occur, it is time to make every day count.

We stand adjourned.