Cascades 501 Wreck 18 December 17

In the UK they have the AWS which is primarily used to enforce the observation of caution and danger (stop) signals. They also can be used for speed restrictions.
The AWS issues an alarm when a signal less than clear is displayed, or if a speed restriction is encountered, requiring the driver to acknowledge else the train goes into emergency. There is a newer TPWS system that had additional safeguards. However in the long term Britain is adopting the European ETCS system.
One feature on sees in the UK is timed signals, where a signal at a junction (interlocking) will show danger (stop) until a certain time has elapsed then the signal clears to display the route. This enforces a certain speed approaching the signal.

alewifebp wrote:
An incredible amount of automation has been added to airplanes. Autopilot, ILS, and in general enough computers on board with backups to backups of systems, and yet still, planes crash. The Metro Red Line was a fully automated line, and it crashed. Nothing is infallible.

But the rate of air crashes has fallen through the floor in the past 4+ decades, thanks to in no small part the NTSB (but also industry's attitude). Recently, a major part of that is ASRS, a official confessional route where crew can report, with immunity, mistakes/shortcomings/near misses. It's been a major success in finding/fixing the issues that fell through the cracks before.

And as a WMATA Red Line rider who knows people who worked on that crash investigation, I can tell you a part of its cause was the total lack of a safety culture such as anyone within aviation has. That's one of the hardest nuts for the new WMATA GM to crack.




{edit: slight wording change}

http://komonews.com/news/local/ntsb-amt ... ic-devices" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Latest report

An initial review of the data recorders and cameras on board the Amtrak train that derailed in DuPont on Monday suggests the train was going 78 mph in the moments before impact -- nearly 50 miles over the speed limit at that location -- and that the crew realized the speed was too high moments before, the NTSB announced Friday.

investigators concluded that the crew was not observed to be using any electronic devices before the crash, and that six seconds before impact, the engineer made a comment about going too fast.

Initial review below:
https://www.ntsb.gov/news/press-release ... 71222.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Inward-facing video with audio captured the crew’s actions and their conversations. A forward-facing video with audio captured conditions in front of the locomotive as well as external sounds.
The crew was not observed to use any personal electronic devices during the timeframe reviewed.
About six seconds prior to the derailment, the engineer made a comment regarding an over speed condition.
The engineer’s actions were consistent with the application of the locomotive’s brakes just before the recording ended. It did not appear the engineer placed the brake handle in emergency-braking mode.
The recording ended as the locomotive was tilting and the crew was bracing for impact.
The final recorded speed of the locomotive was 78 mph.

From the report

ApproachMedium wrote:

litz wrote:On the surface sure doesn't look good ... but if the powerplant's ok, the electrics are ok, and the frame isn't bent, it's most certainly repairable. The rest is pennies cost-wise against those major components.

Wrong. The entire shell is the frame. Its most definitely destroyed. From the views ive seen of the photos this engine is in far worse shape than even the 188 wreck with 601. The whole engineers side cab corner crushed in. There is not a single thing that looks straight on that engine, and the prime mover looks to have top end damage.

The shell is the carbody. See:



The frame is the solid assembly underneath the relatively thin sheet metal of the carbody shell above.

The single two most expensive things on any locomotive are the prime mover, and the frame it's bolted to.

At 3 mph/s deceleration (emergency), if the engineer had activated the brakes instead of commenting about the speed, that trainset would have been between 60-65 mph at time of derailment. Still not enough to stay on the rails, but maybe enough to not go over the bridge?

a prime mover is not made to skip and bounce around in a unsprung fasion , the derailment most likely did do some serious damage to bearings and maybe even crank shaft itself.

Where would the unit have to be hauled to be rebuilt?
Can it be put on a flatbed & hauled by rail?

Or will it be stripped at the Joint Base?

I thought Amtrak uses simuilators to train Acela engineers.

it got moved by truck and after investigation is done, for good ...
https://www.facebook.com/Q13FOX/videos/ ... 689159199/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

EuroStar wrote:Not to get too off-topic, but how are speed restrictions enforced in Europe (say Germany or the UK)? I do not seem to recall any recent speed violation accidents there other than the one in Spain. They run many more trains in Europe than in the US, so one would expect to have many more speeding accidents than we do and still somehow that is not the case. What are they doing better than us? Do they all have their version of PTC installed?

There's been at least one recent fatal derailment, in France in 2015 when a train testing the then new TGV Est line was running at 110% of its service speed, something which required cancelling the usual safety equipment. Coincidentally or not, there were seven people in the cab. The driver failed to brake sufficiently and entered a 110 mph bend at 165 mph, resulting in 11 deaths. The UK heavy railway industry is justifiably proud of its safety record with no fatalities to crew or passengers in more than ten years, but note the qualification "heavy". There was a tram crash in London last year which followed exactly the pattern of the Washington incident with the driver failing to brake for a severe bend immediately following a high speed section.
As to why rail appears to be safer in Europe than the US, it's been claimed elsewhere that the safety culture in America is quite different and relies more on drivers following procedure rather than on introducing measures to mitigate against errors. How true that is I don't know, but I notice that there seems to be no mention of route knowledge in this thread. Possibly different terminology is used, or possibly it's regarded as less important in America. It's regarded as crucial in the UK and the recruitment process involves tests of memory, concentration and perception in order to ensure that the candidate is capable of acquiring and retaining route knowledge.

DutchRailnut wrote:it got moved by truck and after investigation is done, for good ...

It got moved a short distance... Cross country is another story.

DutchRailnut wrote:a prime mover is not made to skip and bounce around in a unsprung fasion , the derailment most likely did do some serious damage to bearings and maybe even crank shaft itself.

From an engineering and mechanical aspect, it would be fascinating to find out if this turns out to be the case. I wonder if we'll ever find out.

Locomotives and other railcars are moved on flatbed cars all the time.

If it's frame is in good enough shape, it could even be fitted with a set of nonpowered trucks and hauled dead-in-tow in a consist.

Could have figured:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-deadly- ... 1513952658" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Fair Use:

In the original plans for the Point Defiance railroad bypass south of Tacoma, Wash., something is missing: the sharp, 30 mile-an-hour curve where an Amtrak train derailed on Monday, killing three passengers.

The $11 billion Washington state government plan to speed up passenger and freight rail service throughout the Pacific Northwest called for the elimination of that tight turn—a change that wasn’t included in the final design when the state eventually won federal funding for the rail bypass.

Instead, the curve where Amtrak Train 501 crashed this week was preserved to keep costs down, according to documents and state officials.

The decision to leave a hazardous curve in place and abandon other improvements is emblematic of a challenge faced by railroad officials around the country. Railroads face pressure from customers and elected officials to increase speed and frequency of train service, even as improvements to the tracks themselves remain extremely expensive.

Addendum; possible route around a paywall:

https://nypost.com/2017/12/22/train-tra ... dly-curve/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;