Northeast Regional 188 - Accident In Philadelphia

Engineers name was posted. Not posting it here just as an act of courtesy to him and his family..

NSTB's home page for the investigation :

http://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/Page ... ia_pa.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

(info, pictures, releases, reports, etc. will be posted here)

litz wrote:NSTB's home page for the investigation :

http://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/Page ... ia_pa.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

(info, pictures, releases, reports, etc. will be posted here)

Got a 401 not authorized.

60 Car wrote:Since the news reports were referencing the 1943 Congressional wreck in the same area, I decided to read up on it because the news has been conveniently leaving out the cause of the 1943 accident.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1943_Frank ... rain_wreck" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Scroll to the bottom of that page and there is already a link to a wiki page for the 188 wreck.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Phila ... derailment" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The ignorance of the media regarding the details and facts of railroading is mind boggling.
The sensational reporting getting side tracked with funding cuts, aging infrastructure , accident statistics, and file footage of 601 showing the cab door being slammed shut like there is something to hide, mention of the 1943 wreck with no further mention of the cause leading those who don't know or have the curiosity to do their own research.

As a career transit employee, it makes me want to throw things at the TV.

Prayers to all those involved and their families.

Now we wait to find out the cause....

I've had a look at a couple channels and CBS Evening News recently gave the reason (Partially why I watch CBS News-Good reporting ). I appreciate that reporters try to deliver good reporting but are just bad at being accurate.

Anyway, it really is a shame that 7 people fell victim to a preventable accident. My heart goes out to their family and friends...

8th Notch wrote: You guys are not understating how the systems work correctly so allow me to shine some light on things. ACSES is the only system that enforces track speed limits, CAB SIGNLAS DO NOT! The area where the accident happened is only governed by cab signals and not ACSES so nothing was physically forcing the engineer to comply with the speed restriction on the curve. The only time track speed limits are displayed and enforced is in ACSES equipped territory which is currently being worked on from NYP south. The ACS, AEM-7, and Acela all have the same ADU's so the engine has nothing to do with anything here unless it was a mechanical failure with the brakes or something.

That is not always the case, cab signals can and do enforce permanent speed restrictions at curves. The Elizabeth S curve comes to mind. Trains approach the curve on both sides at 100+ mph, and the cab signals will drop long enough to force the train to slow down. This could have been done here also. Why it wasn't is beyond me. I am guessing that the powers that be in the signal department never expected a NY bound train to approach the curve at over 100mph, given the track speed before the curve is only 80mph. This was done after the Metro North derailment at Spuyten Duyvil also. This type of set up would not require much in terms of extra infrastructure, in fact just some wiring modifications in the signal huts, since all you are doing is preventing 180 code from sending out to the rails, whether temporary or permanently. The cabs can drop long enough that the train must slow down, and after a certain amount of time elapses after the train enters the block, they can automatically upgrade again. Don't get me wrong, I am all for the expansion of ACSES, the more layers of protection the better. I just wanted to clarify that the present system is fully capable of protecting situations like this from happening.

It is a real surprise to me that such curves are unprotected. I was under the mistaken impression that cab signals and ACSES on the Northeast Corridor would prevent the scenario that we saw in Spain a couple of years ago. This appears to be almost the exact same scenario.

mvb119 wrote:

8th Notch wrote: You guys are not understating how the systems work correctly so allow me to shine some light on things. ACSES is the only system that enforces track speed limits, CAB SIGNLAS DO NOT! The area where the accident happened is only governed by cab signals and not ACSES so nothing was physically forcing the engineer to comply with the speed restriction on the curve. The only time track speed limits are displayed and enforced is in ACSES equipped territory which is currently being worked on from NYP south. The ACS, AEM-7, and Acela all have the same ADU's so the engine has nothing to do with anything here unless it was a mechanical failure with the brakes or something.

That is not always the case, cab signals can and do enforce permanent speed restrictions at curves. The Elizabeth S curve comes to mind. Trains approach the curve on both sides at 100+ mph, and the cab signals will drop long enough to force the train to slow down. This could have been done here also...I just wanted to clarify that the present system is fully capable of protecting situations like this from happening.

It may have been mentioned elsewhere in this thread, but the same method is used to slow southbound trains approaching Frankford Junction (somewhere around Bridesburg, cabs on timetable westward trains always drop to approach limited regardless of actual track conditions). This was implemented due to the large difference between 110-125 and 50 mph. Because the MAS on the other side of Frankford Junction was never more than 70-80 mph, this type of protection wasn't deemed necessary there.

If this was in effect on both sides of the curve like it is for Elizabeth, a disaster could have been averted.

A quick comment:

On the way home today in middle-of-nowhere PA, I listened to the news on NPR and was surprised at the lack of precision with the reporting.

For instance, I heard that Amtrak was created in "the 1970's" from Penn Central. Other points were more correct, but overall a report that was sloppy and tangential at best, from an organization that usually does much better.

Dave Becker

mvb119 wrote:

8th Notch wrote: You guys are not understating how the systems work correctly so allow me to shine some light on things. ACSES is the only system that enforces track speed limits, CAB SIGNLAS DO NOT! The area where the accident happened is only governed by cab signals and not ACSES so nothing was physically forcing the engineer to comply with the speed restriction on the curve. The only time track speed limits are displayed and enforced is in ACSES equipped territory which is currently being worked on from NYP south. The ACS, AEM-7, and Acela all have the same ADU's so the engine has nothing to do with anything here unless it was a mechanical failure with the brakes or something.

That is not always the case, cab signals can and do enforce permanent speed restrictions at curves. The Elizabeth S curve comes to mind. Trains approach the curve on both sides at 100+ mph, and the cab signals will drop long enough to force the train to slow down. This could have been done here also. Why it wasn't is beyond me. I am guessing that the powers that be in the signal department never expected a NY bound train to approach the curve at over 100mph, given the track speed before the curve is only 80mph. This was done after the Metro North derailment at Spuyten Duyvil also. This type of set up would not require much in terms of extra infrastructure, in fact just some wiring modifications in the signal huts, since all you are doing is preventing 180 code from sending out to the rails, whether temporary or permanently. The cabs can drop long enough that the train must slow down, and after a certain amount of time elapses after the train enters the block, they can automatically upgrade again. Don't get me wrong, I am all for the expansion of ACSES, the more layers of protection the better. I just wanted to clarify that the present system is fully capable of protecting situations like this from happening.

In reference to what I was answering, cab signals still do not enforce all permanent track speed limits where ACSES does. I get what your saying but in regards to having non railroad ops understand the two systems then I still stand by my statement. Yes you can put a cab drop to enforce a speed limit however cab signals can't enforce a permanent track speed of 55, 35 etc where ACSES can.

Matt Johnson wrote:It is a real surprise to me that such curves are unprotected. I was under the mistaken impression that cab signals and ACSES on the Northeast Corridor would prevent the scenario that we saw in Spain a couple of years ago. This appears to be almost the exact same scenario.

Prior to the federal PTC mandate, ACSES was only required when operating over speeds of 125 which is why it wasn't south of NYP.

CNJGeep wrote:

litz wrote:NSTB's home page for the investigation :

http://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/Page ... ia_pa.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

(info, pictures, releases, reports, etc. will be posted here)

Got a 401 not authorized.

Could it be something on your end ... I just checked (in multiple browsers) and it came up ...

(also, are you within the US? Could be a geo-lock thing)

I had a feeling it was speed related as soon as I saw that mangled amfleet. There's no way it would have ended up like that at 50 mph...

In any case, what is the word on damage done to the tracks/catenary etc? Looked pretty extensive...

Matt Johnson wrote:It is a real surprise to me that such curves are unprotected. I was under the mistaken impression that cab signals and ACSES on the Northeast Corridor would prevent the scenario that we saw in Spain a couple of years ago. This appears to be almost the exact same scenario.

If, and this is a big IF here, what we've seen so far proves out ...

Exactly what you describe WOULD have prevented this accident. That's exactly what it's designed to do.

However, the ACSES technology (the PTC stuff) isn't implemented on this section of track.

TrainPhotos wrote:In any case, what is the word on damage done to the tracks/catenary etc? Looked pretty extensive...

Just from what I've seen, there's gotta be at least two of the overhead structures completely gone ... and who knows how much wire in that area ...

And that's wire across ALL the tracks (and the other set of tracks next door), plus all the power feeds.

Not going to be a quick fix, for sure.

The BBC radio news has reported that the train was travelling at twice the correct speed for that piece of track. That seems an adequate explanation of the cause of the accident.