This is my understanding of the approach to the curve: The engineer said he did not intend to start braking at the 2-mile warning, but rather at some point after that warning with enough remaining distance to get the train down to 30 mph before reaching the curve.
But after passing the 2-mile warning, he mistakenly judged the curve to be further away than it acutally was. So he never began his planned execution of the proper braking to get slowed down to 30 mph before reaching the curve. Instead, he was surprised to find the curve right in front of him within some mere hundreds of feet, and he was still traveling about 80 mph.
At that point, this was an all-out emergency. But instead of making a full emergency brake application in the hope of at least reducing the damage if the train derailed; or possibly even getting slowed enough to pass the curve without derailing; this engineer made anthother type of application that did not provide the maximum braking deceleration.
He said that he was hoping to get through the curve without derailing while using the less than maximum braking application. Getting through the curve with that type of service application would not require stopping, whereas making an emergency application would stop the train even after getting though the curve, if it was able to get through the curve without derailing.
Perhaps the engineer felt that making it through the curve without derailing, with a less than fully effective braking application, would be better than getting through the curve without derailing, with the most effective brake application because the latter would draw more attention to his mistake of not being prepared for the curve; and it would draw that attention by forcing the train to undgo an emergency stop.
tree68FWIW, the Wikipedia entry for the Chargers indicates "electropneumatic" brakes on the locomotive and the train, which says to me electric over air.
You and Wiki are right. The Charger locomotives are equipped with an lectronicallycontrolled pneumatic brake system. https://web.archive.org/web/20160624101038/http://w3.usa.siemens.com/mobility/us/en/interurban-mobility/rail-solutions/high-speed-and-intercity-trains/Documents/Multi-State_Charger%20DE%20Locomotive_DataSheet_LR.pdfRegards, Volker
VOLKER LANDWEHRPerhaps the brakes reacted different than on the locomotives he ran before?
FWIW, the Wikipedia entry for the Chargers indicates "electropneumatic" brakes on the locomotive and the train, which says to me electric over air. The engineer moves the handle(s), but the actual brake valves are operated by electricity. Both NYAB and Wabtec have such systems.
This, combined with the whistleblower item, leads me to wonder if there was not an issue with that system.
Even if the entire train was ECP, it still takes time for the brakes to apply, and the decelleration curve is not linear. It will take a few moments to realize that the brakes are not having the desired effect.
Five seconds at 79 MPH is a tenth of a mile.
Those who have seen the movie "Sully" will appreciate "35 seconds," although that specific number has absolutely nothing to do with this incident.
That he was apparently completely relying on mileposts and signals for his braking points speaks to his unfamiliarity with the territory, but at least he seems to have had enough knowledge to do some planning.
The two mile warning is exactly that - a warning. Unless it's so specified in GCOR, it's not an indication that braking should begin at that point. This engineer apparently felt that he could slow the train to 30 MPH in less than those two miles. And if everything was working properly (and the engineer is telling it straight), it probably would have been.
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
VOLKER LANDWEHR The only requirements I found in PRIIA specification are for air only. - full service, light locomotive: less than 9,000 ft from 125 mph to stop- emergency, light locomotive: less than 8,000 ft from 125 mph to stop I haven't found information about dynamics. IIRC he used blended braking.Regards, Volker
The only requirements I found in PRIIA specification are for air only.
- full service, light locomotive: less than 9,000 ft from 125 mph to stop- emergency, light locomotive: less than 8,000 ft from 125 mph to stop
I haven't found information about dynamics. IIRC he used blended braking.Regards, Volker
So my basic question is this: Why would an engineer not use the braking that will cause the greates deceleration when suddenly realizing he is about to enter a relatively sharp curve at 50 mph over the curve speed limit?
He knew where he was and he knew what the curve required. He also seemed to imply that he knew that it would be a rather close call to get through the curve without derailing. So why not dump the air and give it all the brake force possible? I have an opinion as an answer to that question.
After going thru the transcript and reading the engineer's statement that the brakes didn't seem to slow the train at all, I was surprised that this news story hasn't attracted more attention: http://trn.trains.com/news/news-wire/2018/07/13-amtrak-mechanic-files-whistleblower-complaint-related-to-cascades-wreck
Also very interesting is the fact that the engineer chose not to make an emergency application for his realization that he was about to enter a 30 mph curve at around 80 mph. He describes his brake application which was not an emergency application. What would be the difference in deceleration prior to the curve between an emergency application and the application that he used instead?
VOLKER LANDWEHR The requirements for the brakes are clearly defined in the specification. The Charger got finally accepted by the buyers so I think the brakes, dynamic and air, comply. The Charger was relatively new to the engineer. He hadn't run it at the new track speed and never encountered the 30 mph curve before, braking down from 79 mph. Perhaps the brakes reacted different than on the locomotives he ran before? On the other hand, the interview was 4 weeks after the accident. The NTSB will look into this I think.Regards, Volker
The requirements for the brakes are clearly defined in the specification. The Charger got finally accepted by the buyers so I think the brakes, dynamic and air, comply.
The Charger was relatively new to the engineer. He hadn't run it at the new track speed and never encountered the 30 mph curve before, braking down from 79 mph.
Perhaps the brakes reacted different than on the locomotives he ran before?
On the other hand, the interview was 4 weeks after the accident. The NTSB will look into this I think.Regards, Volker
I wonder if his "plan" accounted for an additional locomotive on the rear.
zardoz dpeltier When the rule says that the yellow flag goes "two miles in advance of the beginning of the restriction", it's a little ambiguous about whether it means two MP locations or 10,560'. Perhaps some very diligent track inspector noted that the two miles in question were each exactly 5,016' long, so that to get 10,560' he had to go 2.1 railroad miles? When dealing with a 10K+' train and 15K+ tons, tenths of a mile do not really figure in with regards to train handling. The amount of time and distance required to slow a huge train (taking into account track profile, braking effort, use or not of dynamics, temperature, etc.), are large enough to absorb such small distances.
dpeltier When the rule says that the yellow flag goes "two miles in advance of the beginning of the restriction", it's a little ambiguous about whether it means two MP locations or 10,560'. Perhaps some very diligent track inspector noted that the two miles in question were each exactly 5,016' long, so that to get 10,560' he had to go 2.1 railroad miles?
When dealing with a 10K+' train and 15K+ tons, tenths of a mile do not really figure in with regards to train handling. The amount of time and distance required to slow a huge train (taking into account track profile, braking effort, use or not of dynamics, temperature, etc.), are large enough to absorb such small distances.
But tenths do figure in when they might be trying to pull an "Unannounced Yellow Board" test.
The only time I've seen them actually try to measure out two miles for board placement is where we have mileage equasions where a few miles, due to line changes, are missing. Otherwise they just go by the mile posts. I know because we have one really short mile and they don't take that into account when placing boards.
Jeff
dpeltierWhen the rule says that the yellow flag goes "two miles in advance of the beginning of the restriction", it's a little ambiguous about whether it means two MP locations or 10,560'. Perhaps some very diligent track inspector noted that the two miles in question were each exactly 5,016' long, so that to get 10,560' he had to go 2.1 railroad miles?
Thank you, Jeff. You refreshed my memory as to what I noticed on my first trip on the UP, in April of 1972 (City of Portland from Portland to Chicago)..
I am trying to remember just what I saw on the Frisco from Birmingham to Memphis in May of 1963. I do remember that poles were marked.
Johnny
jeffhergert Deggesty As to all UP lines having quarter mile posts, I know that the former Rio Grande has them. I do not remember noticing such on the former SP, T&P, MP, or Katy, but it seems to me that the UP system would be uniform over all the system. Back in the day when they maintained communication/signal lines, most railroads had 40 poles to the mile. In some areas with many, many wires, they may have used 50 poles to the mile. On the 40 per mile, the 10th, 20th and 30th pole would have rings. One ring for the 10th pole, two rings for the 20th pole and three rings for the 30th pole. (UP did use 4 rings on the 40th pole, which also was the mile post location. Others may have also, but I know UP did because some still stand.) Pole 10 also happened to be the quarter mile, Pole 20 the half mile, and pole 30 the three quarter mile. When pole lines were no longer being maintained, CNW cut down all but the poles with the markers. When they first put up signs, they didn't use fraction 1/4, 1/2, or 3/4 numbers, but one, two or three stripes. Eventually, and it may have been after UP took over, they started using the fraction numbers. Those railroads that used the Uniform Code of Operating Rules (RI, MP System, MKT, SSW) used mile post and pole number for restrictions. Both in timetables and train orders. 40 MPH MP 225.25 to MP 225.5 would read 40 MPH MP 225 pole 10 to MP 225 Pole 20. Other railroads, from my train order collection would say something like 40MPH from 10 poles west of MP 225 to 20 poles west of MP 225. Although I know photographers hated the pole lines, I miss them. A main line just doesn't look right without a line side pole line. Even if only one or two crossarms still had wires and three or four other crossarms were just a reminder of what once was. Jeff PS. Which do you prefer, Mile Post or Mile Pole? I've noticed those with a background where the mile marker was attached to a communication pole, they tend to say mile pole. Those who were used to actual mile posts along the track tend to say mile post.
Deggesty As to all UP lines having quarter mile posts, I know that the former Rio Grande has them. I do not remember noticing such on the former SP, T&P, MP, or Katy, but it seems to me that the UP system would be uniform over all the system.
As to all UP lines having quarter mile posts, I know that the former Rio Grande has them.
I do not remember noticing such on the former SP, T&P, MP, or Katy, but it seems to me that the UP system would be uniform over all the system.
Back in the day when they maintained communication/signal lines, most railroads had 40 poles to the mile. In some areas with many, many wires, they may have used 50 poles to the mile. On the 40 per mile, the 10th, 20th and 30th pole would have rings. One ring for the 10th pole, two rings for the 20th pole and three rings for the 30th pole. (UP did use 4 rings on the 40th pole, which also was the mile post location. Others may have also, but I know UP did because some still stand.) Pole 10 also happened to be the quarter mile, Pole 20 the half mile, and pole 30 the three quarter mile. When pole lines were no longer being maintained, CNW cut down all but the poles with the markers. When they first put up signs, they didn't use fraction 1/4, 1/2, or 3/4 numbers, but one, two or three stripes. Eventually, and it may have been after UP took over, they started using the fraction numbers.
Those railroads that used the Uniform Code of Operating Rules (RI, MP System, MKT, SSW) used mile post and pole number for restrictions. Both in timetables and train orders. 40 MPH MP 225.25 to MP 225.5 would read 40 MPH MP 225 pole 10 to MP 225 Pole 20. Other railroads, from my train order collection would say something like 40MPH from 10 poles west of MP 225 to 20 poles west of MP 225.
Although I know photographers hated the pole lines, I miss them. A main line just doesn't look right without a line side pole line. Even if only one or two crossarms still had wires and three or four other crossarms were just a reminder of what once was.
PS. Which do you prefer, Mile Post or Mile Pole? I've noticed those with a background where the mile marker was attached to a communication pole, they tend to say mile pole. Those who were used to actual mile posts along the track tend to say mile post.
Back in the Train Order days - some Divisions on the B&O specified slow orders as Mile 58 Pole 20 to Mile 59 Pole 10.
Back in those days Divisions operated more as separate railroad using a common Rule Book and each Division had it's own interpertations of various rules that did not coincide with the interpertations of other Divisions. When you work three different Divisions you pick up on these things.
One advantage of centralizing Dispatching was the opportunity to standardize rule interpertations over all portions of the property.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
I wonder how much speed reduction would have been requried to meet the engineer's expectation of reducing speed enough to get around the curve without derailing or tipping over.
VOLKER LANDWEHR He had a plan. He said in the NTSB interview that he deemed the 2-mile speed warning too far away from the curve to start braking. From the interview transcript page 44 (pdf-page):Q. Whatever you want to -- however you want to describe it for me. A. Well, I remember in the 79 area, I remember preparing for the curve. I remember coming up to the crossing at 15.5. It's the last crossing. We blow for that one. And then I was preparing for the curve. And I was counting mileposts. I had a plan, planning on, you know, setting about 12, 13 pounds about a mile before the curve. And I had picked out the control point that I think was labeled 18.96 but it's really 18.8 or something like that. And so I was counting mileposts. Went by 16. Went by 17. I hadn't seen 18, and we went by a signal and I was looking for this big white sign that was -- I think it said CP 18.96, but it was a big white sign. I was looking for it. I was looking for a label. And I hadn't seen milepost 18 and I saw the signal and I -- I didn't see it, and I looked down and I saw the next signal and I said, okay, that next signal must be it. So I kept going. And just before getting to that signal, I saw the 30-mile-an-hour sign for the curve. And I went full service and blended. I anticipated that the train -- or the brakes would grab and it would bring the train down in time to safely go around the curve. I figured it was going to be uncomfortable, I might spill some coffee. The brakes didn't do anything. I didn't feel the brakes grab, nothing. And then the track went that way and we went that way. Regards, Volker
He had a plan. He said in the NTSB interview that he deemed the 2-mile speed warning too far away from the curve to start braking. From the interview transcript page 44 (pdf-page):Q. Whatever you want to -- however you want to describe it for me.
A. Well, I remember in the 79 area, I remember preparing for the curve. I remember coming up to the crossing at 15.5. It's the last crossing. We blow for that one. And then I was preparing for the curve. And I was counting mileposts. I had a plan, planning on, you know, setting about 12, 13 pounds about a mile before the curve. And I had picked out the control point that I think was labeled 18.96 but it's really 18.8 or something like that. And so I was counting mileposts. Went by 16. Went by 17. I hadn't seen 18, and we went by a signal and I was looking for this big white sign that was -- I think it said CP 18.96, but it was a big white sign. I was looking for it. I was looking for a label. And I hadn't seen milepost 18 and I saw the signal and I -- I didn't see it, and I looked down and I saw the next signal and I said, okay, that next signal must be it. So I kept going. And just before getting to that signal, I saw the 30-mile-an-hour sign for the curve. And I went full service and blended. I anticipated that the train -- or the brakes would grab and it would bring the train down in time to safely go around the curve. I figured it was going to be uncomfortable, I might spill some coffee. The brakes didn't do anything. I didn't feel the brakes grab, nothing. And then the track went that way and we went that way.
Regards, Volker
So that opens up some entirely different possibilities. 1. If what he said about the brakes is verified my the inspections, then the fault lies with more with equipment and possibly bad markers, less so with him and his training, etc.. 2. If the brakes were ok, then he is just trying to shift blame.
I wonder why the train did not react with the braking effect that he had anticipated when making his application. It is interesting to hear that he had assumed the train would slow down sufficiently to go around the curve without derailing. Yet, it did not slow down at all.
BaltACDCurves and grades are a integral part of railroading, just as they are a integral feature of the world as we know it. As humans we either operate in a manner to safely negotiate those features or we don't.
The point that I see in the engineer's comments about the curve is that he was fully aware of it and its significance. Otherwise, one might get the impression that he had merely had it pointed out during his training trips and failed to assimilate the full importance. His quotes, however, seem to make it clear that the curve was very significant to him and high on his mind as he started the trip.
Yet I don't believe he had an adequate plan for slowing down to the 30 mph speed limit at the curve.
EuclidIn this article, the engineer talks about the curve and says that everybody hated that curve.
And race car drivers hate the curves on the track. [/sarcasm]
Curves and grades are a integral part of railroading, just as they are a integral feature of the world as we know it. As humans we either operate in a manner to safely negotiate those features or we don't.
It is hard to see, but in the Rochell Cam there is a 1/4 sign right before the diamond. This was added (or replaced) recently.
In this article, the engineer talks about the curve and says that everybody hated that curve.
dpeltier wrote[in part] the following post 8 minutes ago:
You look at the track chart, see what it lists as the MP of the nearest identifiable feature (crossing, turnout, signal, MP, permanent speed sign, bridge, etc.) and guesstimate from there.
As to your example... When the rule says that the yellow flag goes "two miles in advance of the beginning of the restriction", it's a little ambiguous about whether it means two MP locations or 10,560'. Perhaps some very diligent track inspector noted that the two miles in question were each exactly 5,016' long, so that to get 10,560' he had to go 2.1 railroad miles?
Or... on second thought... maybe not.
Dan
To Dan and Jeff... Interesting information! I am not sure if we need that sort of re-assurance, or just be concerned that in this day and time, of such precision instruments; GPS, Computers, and mileage calculating instruments, that the human functions of 'eyeballing', and that human fall-back position of just 'gestimation' still seems to work pretty well(?) I guess if it works, you cannot argue with success!
jeffhergert Yes, we have .25, .5 and .75 posts. I round up train length to the next higher tenth. For example 7700 feet is about 1.46 miles so I round up to 1.5 miles. If a restriction ends at MP 225.25 I add, or subtrack depending on direction, 1.5 miles and when the head end reaches that location (MP 226.75 or MP 223.75 as the case may be) we should be clear of the restriction. Rounding up usually also compensates for miles that are a little over 5280 feet.
Yes, we have .25, .5 and .75 posts. I round up train length to the next higher tenth. For example 7700 feet is about 1.46 miles so I round up to 1.5 miles. If a restriction ends at MP 225.25 I add, or subtrack depending on direction, 1.5 miles and when the head end reaches that location (MP 226.75 or MP 223.75 as the case may be) we should be clear of the restriction. Rounding up usually also compensates for miles that are a little over 5280 feet.
Makes sense. Do all UP lines have markers every quarter-mile, or does it depend on the history of the line?
jeffhergert If the actual location doesn't end where a mile or quarter post is located, I just kind of eyeball it. Maybe waiting for the next post to be sure. (Sometimes the way MOW plants their yellow and green flags, it seems they do a lot of eyeballing themselves. Come on guys, you can't hang the yellow board on the mile post itself when it needs to be located a tenth of a mile past the board.) Jeff
If the actual location doesn't end where a mile or quarter post is located, I just kind of eyeball it. Maybe waiting for the next post to be sure. (Sometimes the way MOW plants their yellow and green flags, it seems they do a lot of eyeballing themselves. Come on guys, you can't hang the yellow board on the mile post itself when it needs to be located a tenth of a mile past the board.)
Well yeah they eyeball it, especially when they set the flags from off track. At BNSF, on most lines, if you are in a hyrail there is a way to get your official MP location from a laptop computer, but it's a bit cumbersome, or you can use a distance measuring device that is basically the same as the one on a locomotive. But in many cases it's easier to drive to the nearest crossing or access road and walk from there.
dpeltier jeffhergert PS. Oh, one other thing. I think what's being referred to as an "odometer" is the footage counter. Usually used to determine when your train is clear of a restriction. I use them at times, I usually preffer to convert my train's footage to the nearest tenth of a mile and use mile posts. They aren't always accurate, even those integrated into the computer screens. Just out of curiosity - how does this work? If mileposts are only every mile, knowing to the tenth of a mile where your head end has to be doesn't by itself seem that useful, unless you also have a trick for estimating your current head-end location to a tenth of a mile... Or does your territory have 1/4 mile posts (which at least get you a lot closer)? Thanks, Dan
jeffhergert PS. Oh, one other thing. I think what's being referred to as an "odometer" is the footage counter. Usually used to determine when your train is clear of a restriction. I use them at times, I usually preffer to convert my train's footage to the nearest tenth of a mile and use mile posts. They aren't always accurate, even those integrated into the computer screens.
PS. Oh, one other thing. I think what's being referred to as an "odometer" is the footage counter. Usually used to determine when your train is clear of a restriction. I use them at times, I usually preffer to convert my train's footage to the nearest tenth of a mile and use mile posts. They aren't always accurate, even those integrated into the computer screens.
Just out of curiosity - how does this work? If mileposts are only every mile, knowing to the tenth of a mile where your head end has to be doesn't by itself seem that useful, unless you also have a trick for estimating your current head-end location to a tenth of a mile...
Or does your territory have 1/4 mile posts (which at least get you a lot closer)?
Thanks,
The UP has quartermile posts, so it is not difficult for an experienced engineer to determine the right point. As I recall, the UP used to have ten poles to the mile, and so it was a bit easier yet.
dpeltier BaltACD dpeltier jeffhergert PS. Oh, one other thing. I think what's being referred to as an "odometer" is the footage counter. Usually used to determine when your train is clear of a restriction. I use them at times, I usually preffer to convert my train's footage to the nearest tenth of a mile and use mile posts. They aren't always accurate, even those integrated into the computer screens. Just out of curiosity - how does this work? If mileposts are only every mile, knowing to the tenth of a mile where your head end has to be doesn't by itself seem that useful, unless you also have a trick for estimating your current head-end location to a tenth of a mile... Or does your territory have 1/4 mile posts (which at least get you a lot closer)? Thanks, Dan Documentation given to freight crews on Class 1 carriers give the calculated length of the train - all cars and locomotives have detailed listings of all their pertinant dimensions in a database known as UMLER - Universal Machine Language Equipment Register - The computer program that creates the Train Documents pull the lenght of each listed car and locomotive and add them up to the total length of the train. When the head end passes the 'end limit' of whatever the restriction is, the Engineer starts his counter - when the counter (in feet) exceeds the documented length of the train - the train has cleared the restriction - Roger, I got that, but Jeff said he usually prefers to convert his train length to tenths of a mile and use that to calculate where the head end will be when the train is clear of the restriction, instead of using the counter. That's the part I'm not quite following. Dan
BaltACD dpeltier jeffhergert PS. Oh, one other thing. I think what's being referred to as an "odometer" is the footage counter. Usually used to determine when your train is clear of a restriction. I use them at times, I usually preffer to convert my train's footage to the nearest tenth of a mile and use mile posts. They aren't always accurate, even those integrated into the computer screens. Just out of curiosity - how does this work? If mileposts are only every mile, knowing to the tenth of a mile where your head end has to be doesn't by itself seem that useful, unless you also have a trick for estimating your current head-end location to a tenth of a mile... Or does your territory have 1/4 mile posts (which at least get you a lot closer)? Thanks, Dan Documentation given to freight crews on Class 1 carriers give the calculated length of the train - all cars and locomotives have detailed listings of all their pertinant dimensions in a database known as UMLER - Universal Machine Language Equipment Register - The computer program that creates the Train Documents pull the lenght of each listed car and locomotive and add them up to the total length of the train. When the head end passes the 'end limit' of whatever the restriction is, the Engineer starts his counter - when the counter (in feet) exceeds the documented length of the train - the train has cleared the restriction -
Documentation given to freight crews on Class 1 carriers give the calculated length of the train - all cars and locomotives have detailed listings of all their pertinant dimensions in a database known as UMLER - Universal Machine Language Equipment Register - The computer program that creates the Train Documents pull the lenght of each listed car and locomotive and add them up to the total length of the train.
When the head end passes the 'end limit' of whatever the restriction is, the Engineer starts his counter - when the counter (in feet) exceeds the documented length of the train - the train has cleared the restriction -
Roger, I got that, but Jeff said he usually prefers to convert his train length to tenths of a mile and use that to calculate where the head end will be when the train is clear of the restriction, instead of using the counter. That's the part I'm not quite following.
Everyone has tricks that work for them.
The UMLER stated length views the train in a static state. Various cars within the train have various forms of draft gear that are designed to cushion the act of coupling and the movement of slack throughout the train. Some hot box detectors in their 'defect reports' will also give a car count and/or a train length report. Some of these train length reports will report a train length that may be 100 to 200 feet longer than the length reported in the Train Docs.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.