Bucyrus So, why would the NTSB tell us that they will have the answers in a year or so, but immediately volunteer the answer to a question that nobody it asking?
So, why would the NTSB tell us that they will have the answers in a year or so, but immediately volunteer the answer to a question that nobody it asking?
To distract the news media so they will go away and look for something more sensational to report and leave the inspectors alone.
cacole Bucyrus: So, why would the NTSB tell us that they will have the answers in a year or so, but immediately volunteer the answer to a question that nobody it asking? To distract the news media so they will go away and look for something more sensational to report and leave the inspectors alone.
Bucyrus: So, why would the NTSB tell us that they will have the answers in a year or so, but immediately volunteer the answer to a question that nobody it asking?
We need to hear from Juan Zurita. He has much information that the public needs to hear.
agreed . we have heard nothing about the only person that has factual/witnessed information. i am disappointed as well as skeptical of the ntsb with regards to all event recorders in the lead consists being destroyed. would one of the lead locomotives from either train hage had a camera? im sort of doubting whether we will hear anything from this survivor. the technology is there and already implemented where managers can see your every move with the controls from their office and call you on the radio for having the brake set too long or being in too high of a throttle position. why is the event recorder info not wirelessly downloaded real time??. i also think if there was a problem with signals it will be buried on the 3 dead along with the one survivor told to keep his mouth shut.
The one survivor will not be able to give any meaningful information. The reason? His train is not the one that overran it's authority. The focus will be on the one that was supposed to stop and hold the main. The questions will be forcused on that train and no one survived on that one to give answers.
Jeff
gtown324 agreed . we have heard nothing about the only person that has factual/witnessed information. i am disappointed as well as skeptical of the ntsb with regards to all event recorders in the lead consists being destroyed. would one of the lead locomotives from either train hage had a camera? im sort of doubting whether we will hear anything from this survivor. the technology is there and already implemented where managers can see your every move with the controls from their office and call you on the radio for having the brake set too long or being in too high of a throttle position. why is the event recorder info not wirelessly downloaded real time??. i also think if there was a problem with signals it will be buried on the 3 dead along with the one survivor told to keep his mouth shut.
Obviously you have never been involved in the NTSB investigation process.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
BaltACD gtown324: agreed . we have heard nothing about the only person that has factual/witnessed information. i am disappointed as well as skeptical of the ntsb with regards to all event recorders in the lead consists being destroyed. would one of the lead locomotives from either train hage had a camera? im sort of doubting whether we will hear anything from this survivor. the technology is there and already implemented where managers can see your every move with the controls from their office and call you on the radio for having the brake set too long or being in too high of a throttle position. why is the event recorder info not wirelessly downloaded real time??. i also think if there was a problem with signals it will be buried on the 3 dead along with the one survivor told to keep his mouth shut. Obviously you have never been involved in the NTSB investigation process.
gtown324: agreed . we have heard nothing about the only person that has factual/witnessed information. i am disappointed as well as skeptical of the ntsb with regards to all event recorders in the lead consists being destroyed. would one of the lead locomotives from either train hage had a camera? im sort of doubting whether we will hear anything from this survivor. the technology is there and already implemented where managers can see your every move with the controls from their office and call you on the radio for having the brake set too long or being in too high of a throttle position. why is the event recorder info not wirelessly downloaded real time??. i also think if there was a problem with signals it will be buried on the 3 dead along with the one survivor told to keep his mouth shut.
You couldn't blame those guys for being sick of the stupid questions from reporters though, such as "have you recovered the black box?" or "why can't trains have an accident avoidance system like the one on my SUV?" (actually heard that one, the NTSB guy had to explain that a 10k ton freight train couldn't stop as fast as a 4k pound car.).
You should have heard the ones I had when I had my Fatal during my Deposition from the OTHER SIDES ATTY. How did you know he was dead when you went to check on him. I was like well his head was facing the REAR of the Truck but his body was facing the Other way. The Topper was how did you know you had been in an Accident. I was like well my Cab was facing my radiator while on its side I had Coolant leaking on the road and my windshields were MISSING my Drivers side Fuel Tank had a Hole in it and my trailer also had its landing gear Dolly leg bent to the Frame rail of the Trailer. So I had a clue I had been Hit by something that and the Traffic was STOPPED.
Yes those where 2 Questions I was asked by the Plaintiffs Atty. I can imagine what the Media is asking in BFE to the NTSB wondering why they are there since all they think they investigate is lane Crashes in the Media.
"...The one survivor will not be able to give any meaningful information. The reason? His train is not the one that overran it's authority. The focus will be on the one that was supposed to stop and hold the main. The questions will be forcused on that train and no one survived on that one to give answers..."
[quote user="DwightBranch"]
BaltACD: gtown324: agreed . we have heard nothing about the only person that has factual/witnessed information. i am disappointed as well as skeptical of the ntsb with regards to all event recorders in the lead consists being destroyed. would one of the lead locomotives from either train hage had a camera? im sort of doubting whether we will hear anything from this survivor. the technology is there and already implemented where managers can see your every move with the controls from their office and call you on the radio for having the brake set too long or being in too high of a throttle position. why is the event recorder info not wirelessly downloaded real time??. i also think if there was a problem with signals it will be buried on the 3 dead along with the one survivor told to keep his mouth shut. BaltACD posted: "...Obviously you have never been involved in the NTSB investigation process..." Dwight Branch posted:
gtown324: agreed . we have heard nothing about the only person that has factual/witnessed information. i am disappointed as well as skeptical of the ntsb with regards to all event recorders in the lead consists being destroyed. would one of the lead locomotives from either train hage had a camera? im sort of doubting whether we will hear anything from this survivor. the technology is there and already implemented where managers can see your every move with the controls from their office and call you on the radio for having the brake set too long or being in too high of a throttle position. why is the event recorder info not wirelessly downloaded real time??. i also think if there was a problem with signals it will be buried on the 3 dead along with the one survivor told to keep his mouth shut. BaltACD posted:
BaltACD posted:
"...Obviously you have never been involved in the NTSB investigation process..."
Dwight Branch posted:
"...You couldn't blame those guys for being sick of the stupid questions from reporters though, such as "have you recovered the black box?" or "why can't trains have an accident avoidance system like the one on my SUV?" (actually heard that one, the NTSB guy had to explain that a 10k ton freight train couldn't stop as fast as a 4k pound car.).
[/quote]
Patience is the one seemingly lacking commodity in today's 24 hour newscycle. The Media types seem to ask mindless unthought through questions that are answered in their very questioning while attempting to steer the news in the directions the 'producers' seem to want it to go(?)
My money for common sense information is on the folks who post here that daily operate in that Scaleworld of 12"=1'. Their agenda is sheading light on the truth, while trying to figure out an event, to maybe learn its' inherent lesson, thereby, possibly saving a life in the future of one their coworkers(?).
Dwight Branch's mention of the question asked by an individual to a NTSB type about the 'collision- avoidance system' speaks volumes of the lack of understanding the public displays of the dynamics of a railroad train, and how they can endanger themselves by that same lack of understanding, and common sense.
A person does not ordinarily grab a car's door-post, and hold on while slamming it. If so they generally, will not do it twice...
gtown324 BaltACD, obviously you dont currently work on the railroad as a conductor or locomotive engineer or never have. i love people whose first words off their tongue are 'obviously'. obviously you assume everything and you know NOTHING.
BaltACD, obviously you dont currently work on the railroad as a conductor or locomotive engineer or never have. i love people whose first words off their tongue are 'obviously'. obviously you assume everything and you know NOTHING.
Only 47 years in the industry on both management and labor sides of the equation in a variety of field positions - investigating and being investigated.
Unfortunately, it looks like the UP and the NTSB are going to have a lot of communication and work together over the next year or so . . .
Huh? No meaningful information?
Zurita can tell us a lot.
For one thing, he can tell us why he jumped off a perfectly good train. And why. And when. And how.
He can tell us what the situation was in the eastbound cab.
He could tell us what the engineer was doing and why he didn't jump too.
He could tell us the engineer's last words . . . and a lot more.
Not meaningful?
I don't see it that way at all.
Well, that stuff is meaningful in the sense that we will hear from him that he reacted properly when he saw that something was amiss. But nothing on your list will explain what was going on in the cab of the other train--the one that disobeyed two signals and didn't see the headlight coming at it. So although your list of stuff would be very meaningful for a dramatization of the event (and will eventually be heard often by Mr. Zurita's grandchildren if they're lucky the first dozen times), they won't do more than corroborate information that the NTSB has probably already found out.
Carl
Railroader Emeritus (practiced railroading for 46 years--and in 2010 I finally got it right!)
CAACSCOCOM--I don't want to behave improperly, so I just won't behave at all. (SM)
Speed: a factor in the results but not the cause of the results. Survivor: has a lot to tell investigators as to what he and his engineer knew about what was happening on the track, on the cab signals, on the radio, in their minds, etc. Witnesses: from the truck driver who kept on driving to those on the scene within seconds all potentially have great input investigators will collect and examine. Media: don't know the right questions of the right people to understand what went on, is going on, and will be going on but do know how to collecte sensational sound bytes from blabber mouths with nothing to say but words...we are such a media mad society, we now jump in front of cameras and jerk mocrophones out of the hands of media people just to be a momentary star. Railfans: speculators, rumorists, rag gnawers, injectors, hypothicaters, prognosticators of doom and damnation. Fun thread so far, in fact. Even the words I made up are part of the game!
RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.
I assume the westbound crew expected to see the eastbound coming toward them as a matter of course. I suppose it might have been possible for the crew to see the eastbound when it was still a couple miles away, where its speed would not be easy to judge. If so, they must have been in stunned disbelief to suddenly realize that, rather than just drifting down toward them preparing to stop in the clear of the siding switch, as they expected, the eastbound was actually galloping down the track toward them at full speed.
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
FlaCat Huh? No meaningful information? Zurita can tell us a lot. For one thing, he can tell us why he jumped off a perfectly good train. And why. And when. And how. He can tell us what the situation was in the eastbound cab. He could tell us what the engineer was doing and why he didn't jump too. He could tell us the engineer's last words . . . and a lot more. Not meaningful? I don't see it that way at all.
Most of what you ask has been put out there, if not officially.
He jumped because he realized they were going to collide.
He can't say what the situation was on the eastbound train because he wasn't on it.
The engineer on his train put the train into emergency and was also going to jump, but waited too late.
All of this is in reaction for the eastbound seemingly failing to follow signal indications and stop at the switch. From the accounts so far, the westbound the (which Mr. Zurita jumped from) was being operated properly, in accordance with the rules and signal indications. He, and his late engineer really aren't going to be the focus of why it happened. Sure, they will go through them and their movements for the previous few days, go over their phone records and probably those of every TE&Y within a 100 miles of the collision. Still, the eastbound is going to be the real focus of it all. Was the crew alert and attentive? If not, why not? What signal aspects did they see? If they were more restrictive than clear, why weren't they complied with? The switch that was run thru kind of speaks for itself, but questions of what was or wasn't going on in the cab can never be definitely answered.
Of course, the railroad will do all they can to put the blame on the crew. I've heard the stories of how recorded information, whether data or video, seems to either be unobtainable or is "lost" when it might incriminate the railroad or would clear those being blamed. Maybe it has happened, but I doubt as often as you're probably thinking and probably not in major accident investigations involving the Federal authorities. And they have fired managers for falsifying information.
So, no, I don't think information from Mr. Zurita will be that meaningful as to why it happened.
Since it seems so important to you, train service senioirity date 10/98; engine service date 9/04 and BLET member.
Does the recorder from the helper engine show control functions of the lead engine?
Is there any way of knowing what control changes were made on the lead locomotive for several miles leading up to the crash?
Is there any way of knowing whether a brake application was or was not made by the eastbound as they approached the point of impact?
How common is it for the event recorder to not survive a crash?
The DPU locomotives event recorders will have throttle and brake information that will be useful. I don't consider it too surprising that the event recorders of the lead locomotives may not have survived to the point of being useful due to the extreme impact forces. While the train speeds were not that high, when you factor in the weight of the trains the impact forces grow very quickly.
If they can transmit signals to operate the DPU, I would assume that they backup the leading event recorder to the DPU by transmitting its data. Then there would be far less chance of losing the event recorder data in a head end wreck.
Therefore, if the lead event recorder data is all backed up on the DPU, they would know all control function changes that the engineer made up to the point of impact, including resetting the alerter.
If they know all of that, why are they telling us that the lead event recorders were destroyed? So what if they were destroyed?
Bucyrus If they can transmit signals to operate the DPU, I would assume that they backup the leading event recorder to the DPU by transmitting its data. Then there would be far less chance of losing the event recorder data in a head end wreck. Therefore, if the lead event recorder data is all backed up on the DPU, they would know all control function changes that the engineer made up to the point of impact, including resetting the alerter. If they know all of that, why are they telling us that the lead event recorders were destroyed? So what if they were destroyed?
DPU engines are not opeated in lock step with the leaders. The leaders could be operating in Run 8 and the DPU could be at idle. My understanding of locomotive event recorders, they record the events that take place on that individual unit. DPU units would not be recording alerter actions that took place in the lead unit, for that matter the 2nd unit on the head end would not be recording alerter actions that took place on the lead unit.
When the leader commands the DPU to to something, increase throttle, go to dynamic braking etc, those control inputs would be recorded on the DPU. All engines would be monitoring both brake line pressure and speed.
jeffhergert FlaCat: Huh? No meaningful information? Zurita can tell us a lot. For one thing, he can tell us why he jumped off a perfectly good train. And why. And when. And how. He can tell us what the situation was in the eastbound cab. He could tell us what the engineer was doing and why he didn't jump too. He could tell us the engineer's last words . . . and a lot more. Not meaningful? I don't see it that way at all. Most of what you ask has been put out there, if not officially. He jumped because he realized they were going to collide. He can't say what the situation was on the eastbound train because he wasn't on it. The engineer on his train put the train into emergency and was also going to jump, but waited too late. All of this is in reaction for the eastbound seemingly failing to follow signal indications and stop at the switch. From the accounts so far, the westbound the (which Mr. Zurita jumped from) was being operated properly, in accordance with the rules and signal indications. He, and his late engineer really aren't going to be the focus of why it happened. Sure, they will go through them and their movements for the previous few days, go over their phone records and probably those of every TE&Y within a 100 miles of the collision. Still, the eastbound is going to be the real focus of it all. Was the crew alert and attentive? If not, why not? What signal aspects did they see? If they were more restrictive than clear, why weren't they complied with? The switch that was run thru kind of speaks for itself, but questions of what was or wasn't going on in the cab can never be definitely answered. Of course, the railroad will do all they can to put the blame on the crew. I've heard the stories of how recorded information, whether data or video, seems to either be unobtainable or is "lost" when it might incriminate the railroad or would clear those being blamed. Maybe it has happened, but I doubt as often as you're probably thinking and probably not in major accident investigations involving the Federal authorities. And they have fired managers for falsifying information. So, no, I don't think information from Mr. Zurita will be that meaningful as to why it happened. Since it seems so important to you, train service senioirity date 10/98; engine service date 9/04 and BLET member. Jeff
FlaCat: Huh? No meaningful information? Zurita can tell us a lot. For one thing, he can tell us why he jumped off a perfectly good train. And why. And when. And how. He can tell us what the situation was in the eastbound cab. He could tell us what the engineer was doing and why he didn't jump too. He could tell us the engineer's last words . . . and a lot more. Not meaningful? I don't see it that way at all.
Jeff, is there any chance the crew of the westbound could have seen through the front cab windows of the eastbound, even a quick glance to see if they were in their seats, i.e. to rule out carbon monoxide (not sure that is likely, but it is possible)? On older units one might have been able to but I haven't passed a train at speed in the cab of the new safety cab units with the glare protection.
BaltACD,
I understand what you are saying about the DPUs not responding as though they were in MU. But I was just thinking that since they transmit DPU signals from the head end to the DPUs, they could also send the head end event recorder data just for the purpose of backing it up. In this day and age, it seems kind of old fashioned to risk losing this ultra critical data in a wreck just because it is not backed up. I would think they would be able to save all the data at a remote site as soon as the data is created. It seems like the controlling unit event recorder would have had the possibility of yielding information that would have led to several different possible conclusions about what the engineer was doing.
Maybe backing up the event recorders in real time is something for the Trains Tech Column.
1. Comment
If the cause for the eastbound crews actions were carbon monoxide poisoning, then that should come out in an autopsy.
Rgds IGN
FYI someone has some video from the scene.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4t67iF9FgYI&feature=related
I was surprised to see this headline in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch:
Federal officials say a train drivers' failing eyesight was the probable cause of a fiery train crash that killed three people in the Oklahoma Panhandle last year.
The National Transportation Safety Board voted 5-0 at a meeting Tuesday in Washington to formally adopt the cause of the June 24 accident near the town of Goodwell.
Investigators also proposed 16 new safety recommendations to curb future accidents. Those include more frequent medical exams for employees in safety-sensitive jobs and the development of a peer-to-peer program that encourages workplace safety.
Dr. Mary Pat McKay told the agency that the driver of the eastbound train had complained that his eyesight fluctuated from day to day. McKay says the driver couldn't always distinguish between the red and green lights of trackside signals.
James
Is this the most current information? As I understand it, the engineer knew that his vision was varying from day to day, and could therefore recognize when it was at its poorest state. Also, as I understand it, the engineer could not disinguish red from green at times.
What I wonder is whether the engineer routinely passed signals while realizing that he could not tell their aspect.
That would be much different than failing to interpret the aspect of signals being passed, but not being aware of the failure.
The latter would be an accident. The former would be a crime.
The Butler I was surprised to see this headline in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch: NTSB: Poor eyesight probable cause of Okla. Crash Federal officials say a train drivers' failing eyesight was the probable cause of a fiery train crash that killed three people in the Oklahoma Panhandle last year. The National Transportation Safety Board voted 5-0 at a meeting Tuesday in Washington to formally adopt the cause of the June 24 accident near the town of Goodwell. Investigators also proposed 16 new safety recommendations to curb future accidents. Those include more frequent medical exams for employees in safety-sensitive jobs and the development of a peer-to-peer program that encourages workplace safety. Dr. Mary Pat McKay told the agency that the driver of the eastbound train had complained that his eyesight fluctuated from day to day. McKay says the driver couldn't always distinguish between the red and green lights of trackside signals.
I'll throw my personal indictment of color-light signals that are being installed in response to the PTC mandate on many lines, replacing Color-Position-Light and Position-Light signals.
The PRR's Position-Light signals had lights that were all the same color and conveyed their indication via the various angled positions that the lights were displayed. Color blindness was not a factor in being able to see and understand the signal indication. In later years the succesors to the PRR began installing colored lights in certain of the aspects that the signals displayed, tranforming them into Color-Position-Light signals.
The B&O started installing Color-Position-Light signals in the late 1920's. Where the PRR signal, for many indications use multiple signal heads. The B&O CPL's conveyed all their indications on a single signal head and used 'marker' light at positions around the main signal head to further qualify the indication that was being displayed. So long as one could determine the agled position of what was displayed on the main signal head and identify the location of the marker light in relation to the main head, color blindness did not interfere with understanding the signal indication being displayed.
Going to color-light signals put a premium on color recognition.
But haven't color light signals been standard on many railroads for a long time? Had the color light signals where this wreck took place been recently installed to replace color-position-light signals or position-light signals?
Bucyrus Is this the most current information? As I understand it, the engineer knew that his vision was varying from day to day, and could therefore recognize when it was at its poorest state. Also, as I understand it, the engineer could not disinguish red from green at times. What I wonder is whether the engineer routinely passed signals while realizing that he could not tell their aspect. That would be much different than failing to interpret the aspect of signals being passed, but not being aware of the failure. The latter would be an accident. The former would be a crime.
Where was the conductor? Did the conductor know of his cab partner's problem? If he did then he should have been much more alert, but even if he did not he also has the responsibility to see and call out the signal aspects.
The crew had just come on duty at Dalhart about 35 miles from the collision and should have been rested. This seems to need more explaination to the public who are unaware that the second person in the cab has a responsibility. Maybe the NTSB is using this explaination to further the case for PTC to a naive public.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.