Northeast Regional 188 - Accident In Philadelphia

Tommy Meehan wrote:The conductor of 188, who has already filed a lawsuit against Amtrak, was in the first car and suffered a broken neck.

[He] was taking a restroom break in the first car during his work shift when the passenger train went off the rails, attorney Bruce Nagel told a news conference, saying the train suddenly surged forward and then crashed. News link

There were eight fatalities but I feel certain many more people were probably riding in the first car. Was the first car the Business Class/Amcafe? The photo I posted earlier taken by someone on board 188 was taken in the Amcafe. There were obviously survivors.

No, NEC trains are typically 7-8 cars and the cafe was in the middle.
The entire first car was business class.

The second car the quiet car.
The 3rd car(where I typically sit on NEC trains) was the first "normal" coach.
The cafe car was the 4th car (I believe).

n2cbo wrote:Some Short Lines (The Black River & Western comes to mind) got a waiver since they use the cell phones to dispatch the Railroad. I believe that the crew are issued Company Cell Phones to use in this case. If I am wrong, Please someone correct me, as this information is a few years old.

As far as I know, you're correct. I believe that the fed codes allow use of electronic devices in the cab for the following:

If the device contains the reference materials that are needed to perform the job

To report emergencies

Taking photos for documenting and reporting hazardous conditions

Using a/as a calculator

Medical devices

On trains that are exempt from the requirement of a working radio

You would think more than 8 people would have been riding in the business class car, but maybe not. Even if all of the fatalities were in there, that number would seem low for the condition of that car. Perhaps it really was that empty (less than 10 people).

Zeke wrote:Tonight while perusing the Yard Limits.com Amtrak forum found a interesting Washington Post article dated May 15, by author Lydia De Pillis. The title, " Was the engineer on Amtrak 188 too tired to drive? " underneath it " Labor union says engineer of train was likely fatigued because of Amtrak's cost-driven schedule changes." Gist of article claims Amtrak cranking up the usage of short turnarounds and possibly ? compromising safety. Perhaps one of you more literate computer whizzes could retrieve the article and post it here on this thread. Found the article quite illuminating in exposing the "turn up the wick" mentality at Amtrak and it's potential link to this accident.

Here's a link, wasn't hard to find. Just googled the author's name:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/won ... -to-drive/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

n2cbo wrote:Some Short Lines (The Black River & Western comes to mind) got a waiver since they use the cell phones to dispatch the Railroad. I believe that the crew are issued Company Cell Phones to use in this case. If I am wrong, Please someone correct me, as this information is a few years old.

No, you are correct.

That is, in fact, the other sole exception ...

To be used for dispatcher purposes only, on a company issued device, and (usually) only when not in motion.

E.g., if the dispatcher has to contact you, that contact has to go to a crew member not operating the locomotive.

These rules are very very very strict, very very very draconian.

When the hammer fell after Chatsworth, it was basically wielded by Thor.

justalurker66 wrote:

Tadman wrote:These 8 deaths may be the only passenger train non-grade crossing incidents this year.

I certainly hope so ... this one incident reflects roughly a third of the average passenger fatalities for a year.

As far as the comparisons to highway death rates, comparing deaths per TRILLIONS of passenger miles on the road vs millions of miles on passenger rail. Comparing millions of vehicles with no fixed guideways and primarily amateur drivers to thousands of larger vehicles operated solely by professionals. It is hardly a fair comparison.

I guess this is kinda the point I was getting at. We freak out at 8 deaths - cause to be determined (operator, equipment, or outside humans) when there is a really good training, maintenance, and rules enforcement program. Contrast that with roads - there is almost no training, maintenance is primarily reactive, and rules are loosely enforced. That system sees 30,000 deaths/year and nobody freaks out, nobody even bats an eyelid. My mother will barely get on a plane (needs booze) and will not ride in the front car of South Shore MU's but she wheels around town with bad shocks, low tires and does 75 in a 55 all day long. What's wrong here??? (true story about by mother...)

Setting expectations is important. When I place my life in someone else's hands, such as a railroad, I expect a safe on time journey. at least safe.

The South Shore has a decent safety record. The last passenger fatal incident was when three passengers were killed at a grade crossing (the train hit a flatbed with a steel coil) in 1998. The South Shore killed seven in 1993 at a gauntlet track. Both the crossing and the gauntlet have been removed. Prior to 1993 their last passenger fatal accident was in 1926 (one passenger killed). The other 12 passengers killed on the South Shore were in 1909 - over 100 years ago. There have been a couple of motormen (engineers) killed at the fault of the railroad.

Overall, a good record - I'd ride in the front car. And support the installation of PTC even on the safe South Shore.

Tadman wrote:I guess this is kinda the point I was getting at. We freak out at 8 deaths - cause to be determined (operator, equipment, or outside humans) when there is a really good training, maintenance, and rules enforcement program. Contrast that with roads - there is almost no training, maintenance is primarily reactive, and rules are loosely enforced. That system sees 30,000 deaths/year and nobody freaks out, nobody even bats an eyelid. My mother will barely get on a plane (needs booze) and will not ride in the front car of South Shore MU's but she wheels around town with bad shocks, low tires and does 75 in a 55 all day long. What's wrong here??? (true story about by mother...)

I think the reason people freak out more about things like this than automobile accidents has to do with both the fact that you're directly paying for the transportation service, and that the accident is completely out of their control. That's just my hunch about it, though, as that's a really complex sociological issue.

Silverliner II wrote: The train dispatchers would have known there was a problem of some kind as soon as the wreck happened, because of track occupancy lights going up as the circuits were broken, and same for when the circuit breakers started popping when the catenary and signal wires went down. But they would not know it was due to a derailment, collision, or other situation until a report came in. Out in the field, the two westbounds I mentioned would still have been at and east of Trenton, so they would have been told to hold there. #769 evidently made it to North Philadelphia JUST before the derailment, as a friend's mother was on that train and she said they found out what happened as they were waiting at North Philadelphia to disembark for buses.

When the track occupancy lights went up as the circuits were broken, the signals on either side of those circuits would also have automatically dropped to their most restrictive indication, stopping approaching trains except any that were too close to stop in time, in which case the dispatcher wouldn't be able to stop them either. (That remains one intractable problem: a derailment occurring immediately in front of a train on an adjacent track.)

Sounds like had SEPTA 769 been on time without incident it would have been wiped out by 188 this would have been a much bigger disaster.

ExCon90 wrote: When the track occupancy lights went up as the circuits were broken, the signals on either side of those circuits would also have automatically dropped to their most restrictive indication, stopping approaching trains except any that were too close to stop in time, in which case the dispatcher wouldn't be able to stop them either. (That remains one intractable problem: a derailment occurring immediately in front of a train on an adjacent track.)

Also don't forget, anything that wasn't diesel approaching that area, even if they got past a signal (it turned red after they went passed by) would have lost power.

A surprisingly accurate and concise summary :

http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/20/opinions/ ... index.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

ekt8750 wrote:Sounds like had SEPTA 769 been on time without incident it would have been wiped out by 188 this would have been a much bigger disaster.

...Or...

If it had been running ontime, it may have "paced" Amtrak 188 and the engineer could have seen "I'm going way too fast" earlier...

...or...

he may have seen it ahead of him and naturally slowed down.

Lots of ifs. Some of them might have actually been helpful

ekt8750 wrote:Sounds like had SEPTA 769 been on time without incident it would have been wiped out by 188 this would have been a much bigger disaster.

Wasn't 769 ahead of 188 before it was delayed?

Septa 769 is scheduled to leave 30th St at 9:00 - North Philadelphia at 9:10. At 9:28 it should have been at Eddington.
Amtrak 188 is scheduled to leave 30th St at 9:10.

litz wrote:

ExCon90 wrote: When the track occupancy lights went up as the circuits were broken, the signals on either side of those circuits would also have automatically dropped to their most restrictive indication, stopping approaching trains except any that were too close to stop in time, in which case the dispatcher wouldn't be able to stop them either. (That remains one intractable problem: a derailment occurring immediately in front of a train on an adjacent track.)

Also don't forget, anything that wasn't diesel approaching that area, even if they got past a signal (it turned red after they went passed by) would have lost power.

Presuming all lines are on the same phase, which I would say , for safety sake, they would be. and for crossovers with out needing a phase break..
I wonder if the extra flashes were the high voltage utility lines coming down . If it had these on top at this location.