• Cascade Wreck 18 December 17

  • Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.
Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.

Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, mtuandrew, Tadman

  • 662 posts
  • 1
  • 37
  • 38
  • 39
  • 40
  • 41
  • 45
  by Nasadowsk
 
I wouldn't be surprised if Talgo just up and leaves the US market in the near future.
  by lstone19
 
Vincent wrote: I can't see how WSDOT and Amtrak could continue to operate the Talgos given the findings of the NTSB. I've enjoyed them and hope to have at least a few more trips before they are converted into beer cans.
The NTSB can only make recommendations. They have no authority to actually implement their recommendations. Many of their aviation recommendations have been ignored and IMHO, rightly so. Their recommendations tend to be based on "you can't be too careful" and tend to ignore economic realities.
  by ApproachMedium
 
Talgos comparison to conventional equipment id say is legit if you consider amtraks recent wrecks. but as far as new trains, probably not. The talgo car bodies may have held together but the wheelsets position and disconnect becoming a projectile is no exception. If that wheelset had not set loose, 3 lives may still be with us. Even in recent amtrak wrecks like 188, the deaths were not caused by loose wheelsets even though trucks did come off of cars, they were caused by the structural failure of the car itself which at that age, and speed there wasnt much else that could have been done. A newer car may have fared slightly better, but splitting a cat pole at 100mph isnt going to do well for ANYTHING.
  by Tadman
 
Vincent wrote:It looks like the end may be near for the Talgo VI trainsets if WSDOT and Amtrak follow the recommendations of the NTSB.
Recommendation 11 from the report:
Discontinue the use of the Talgo Series VI trainsets as soon as possible and replace them with passenger railroad equipment that meet all current United States safety requirements.
.
My God the NTSB could not be more idiotic if they soaked their heads in a toilet and ate their own feces.

HOW ABOUT NOT F***ING GOING WAY OVER THE TRACK SPEED???????

HOW ABOUT PROPERLY TRAINING CREWS OVER TERRITORY???? Instead of backwards in the dark?

Seriously, say this out loud to yourself a few times: "we're going to familiarize crews with a territory by running them backwards after dark a few times". I hope you were nowhere near anybody, because they'd have you committed. But that's what Amtrak did, and it killed people. Garbage in, garbage out. Why don't they just give the crews a copy of MS Train Sim and maybe some flash cards at this point?

But now we've got a new rule that will result in retiring perfectly good train cars because some dumba**es couldn't keep their act together and not violate basic rules of the railroad. Sound familiar? It should. At Chatsworth, some dumba** couldn't keep his hands off the cellphone. He killed fifteen people. Now we have PTC. $15b later, we haven't put a dent in railroad related deaths but we keep making new rules. I FEEL SO MUCH SAFER.

Seriously, I give up. Let's shut the whole system down and not run trains at all, ever.
  by Gilbert B Norman
 
Nasadowsk wrote:I wouldn't be surprised if Talgo just up and leaves the US market in the near future.
Agreed, Mr. Nas; "send 'em back where they came from". Maybe RENFE can find something to do with them. One ride, Bilbao to Madrid during '90, was enough for me in this life.

With the "broken" safety culture, Mr. Anderson "inherited" and having come from an industry (despite some recent "missteps") in which safety is paramount, I don't think Talgo equipment has much further "life expectancy" on US rails.

Until new equipment is ordered and placed in service, I think the Horizons, as they are released from Midwest service, will make the Northwest their "retirement comminity".

Oh, and lest we note, the lawyers are looking at a "profit opportunity"; for by the time its over, there will be more suits in court than Men's Wearhouse has on the racks.
  by dowlingm
 
While the NTSB may not have legal authority to force an action by Amtrak such as retiring the Talgos, it would certainly be a bad start to any lawsuits arising from even slight derailments in the future, especially when the media is roped in.

I wonder how much actual work has been done on repairing "Mt. Jefferson" Series 8 trainset in Milwaukee pending the outcome of this process.
  by justalurker66
 
Tadman wrote:HOW ABOUT NOT F***ING GOING WAY OVER THE TRACK SPEED???????

HOW ABOUT PROPERLY TRAINING CREWS OVER TERRITORY???? Instead of backwards in the dark?
Not wrecking trains simply hides the problem of the train sets not being crash worthy.

Nippon Sharyo lost the US market because their new cars didn't meet overly stringent new standards. Why not Talgo?

BTW: You missed "HOW ABOUT IMPLEMENTING POSITIVE TRAIN CONTROL TO OVERSEE TRAIN OPERATIONS????" :-D
(If you don't want PTC, stop wrecking trains.)
  by rcthompson04
 
I don't care if the trains are ran perfectly. They still need to be crashworthy for the network they run on as accidents happen. This does not even seem like a "North American" crashworthiness issue though. This sounds like a design flaw.
  by John_Perkowski
 
First, staff presentation slides to the meeting

https://www.ntsb.gov/news/events/Docume ... tation.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Second,

Amtrak’s submission was ... pin the blame on the engineer

Third,

Looks like NTSB blames the CAUSE on training and qualification process bein inadequate, as Tad says.

Fourth,

Looks like NTSB blamed the CONSEQUENCES on the Talgo VI, which is wavered but not compliant to FRA passenger safety construction rules.

Tad, I agree with the board...the combination of factors, once the wreck began, resulted in fatalities. 2/3 of the answer is better training and qualification, the last third is compliant equipment.

Now, anyone tracking lawsuits stemming from the wreck?
  by Tadman
 
I can’t abide by the crash worthiness thing. Somehow the Europeans have run Talgos for decades and not had this problem. The Talgo safety record in Europe is fantastic.

It’s ridiculous to solve the symptoms without solving the root cause. We don’t do it in medicine, we don’t do it in law, why do it in railroad engineering?

Can you imagine mandating medical treatment that would cover symptoms instead of root cause? It would be a public health disaster.

The fact is the Talgo, here or in Europe, has a very good safety record. You could drive any train you want off a bridge at 80mph and there will be serious casualties.

And then they probably get into the seatbelts-on-trains thing, as if the idiocy hasn’t gone far enough.

Remember Occam’s Razor? The simplest solutions are the best. Don’t drive trains off a bridge at high speed. Don’t do familiarization runs in the dark when you can’t see to be familiar. Don’t go as fast as possible on the first few trips over a new route.

This is like Metro North in Valhalla. Quit blaming the third rail design that hasn’t hurt anybody since Commodore Vanderbilt’s time and quit stopping on the tracks. Simple simple simple. Nobody would be dead.

But what do I know, I’m only a published expert on industrial safety.
  by lstone19
 
Tadman wrote:I can’t abide by the crash worthiness thing. Somehow the Europeans have run Talgos for decades and not had this problem. The Talgo safety record in Europe is fantastic.
I agree with Tadman. NTSB recommendations tend go very deep along the lines of since this first thing was screwed up, as well as the second and third thing, that left this fourth thing as a factor. Had any of the first, second, and third things not gone wrong, the fourth thing that they recommend should be fixed would never have been a factor. And while the fourth thing will not be a factor again unless those first three things all go wrong again, they want to fix that fourth thing. Put the money into fixing those first three things and then there's no need to fix number four. But they'd rather pour lots of money into fixing that last thing as their thought seems to be WHEN those first three things go wrong again (as if it's inevitable) rather than let's make sure those first three things don't go wrong again.
  by David Benton
 
Interesting Talgo say the Talgo cars would have made it around the curve, if it wasn't for the heavy USA style loco pulling them off. Wonder what kind of timetable would be possible if they had the Pendulum style loco they were Designed to run with ?
Talgo have supplied engineering drawings of additional straps to hold the "trucks" in, but point out the forces involved would probably have detached any kind of trucks on any equipment.
Will Amtrak fit truck restraints to all equipment.
Interesting point about the pluses and minuses of pop out emergency window when sliding along gravel .
  by Gilbert B Norman
 
justalurker66 wrote:
Tadman wrote:HOW ABOUT NOT F***ING GOING WAY OVER THE TRACK SPEED???????

HOW ABOUT PROPERLY TRAINING CREWS OVER TERRITORY???? Instead of backwards in the dark?
Not wrecking trains simply hides the problem of the train sets not being crash worthy.

Nippon Sharyo lost the US market because their new cars didn't meet overly stringent new standards. Why not Talgo?
Messrs. Dunville and Lurker, the "safety culture" at Amtrak is broken.

Frankford.....Chester......duPont.....Caycee. By now Mr. Anderson has learned that railroad incidents (note my avoidance of the term "accident") become known by the location at which they occur.

I don't think Delta has had a passenger fatality in over twenty years. (I don't hold anything that happened on 9/11 accountable to AA or UA; SWA (WN), and the FAA, need recognize you can "only blow up the balloon so many times" before it "pops").

I think my point has been made.
  • 1
  • 37
  • 38
  • 39
  • 40
  • 41
  • 45