Trains.com

Amtrak Wreck in Philadelphia

70034 views
1561 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Wednesday, May 20, 2015 11:21 AM

[quote user="Buslist"]

[quote user="oltmannd]

I have no idea what the software testing standard for PTC is, or will be.  It most certainly won't (and can't) rise to the "fail safe" standard of signal system hardware and software. 

 

[/quote]

 

FRA rules require 99.9... (5 9s) reliable, how can that be assured ? 

[/quote]

In the non-PTC world, all the safety critical stuff is in the signal bungalo and locomotive cab signal box.  In the PTC world, all that safety critical stuff is now distributed all over creation.  You have a braking algorithm that depends on a consist?  You've just added AEI scanners and tags and hump scales to your safety system.  You want transmit a movement authority?  Now all the radios and dispatching system and software are part of the safety system.  

You can't even begin to test this stuff "track circuit and interlocking" reliability and test every failure mode.

-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Wednesday, May 20, 2015 11:27 AM

Dakguy201

This is an article by someone with a background in disaster management who happened to be a passenger on train 188.  In brief, it suggests the Philadelphia police and fire departments responded with the competent professionalism we hope all such organizations possess, but Amtrak performed poorly in the days following the wreck.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/05/amtrak-188-survivor-118123.html

 

Yes.  Interesting.  Amtrak is disfunctional at many levels, it seems.  

What I've yet to hear is any report on the performance of the train crew after the wreck.  I'd like to think they are well trained on what to do. We often hear that we can't have non-railroad service employees on trains because they are aren't trained in how to deal with disasters.  It would be good to know how those who are trained performed.

-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    December 2003
  • From: Fort Worth, TX
  • 78 posts
Posted by WDGF on Wednesday, May 20, 2015 11:35 AM

oltmannd
...In the PTC world, all that safety critical stuff is now distributed all over creation...

Moving for a moment from failure senarios to vadalism or worse, doesn't this make an already somewhat vulnerable system even MORE vulnerable to attack?

  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Wednesday, May 20, 2015 11:41 AM

wanswheel

The damage to the windshield occurred either before or after the crash became inevitable. It’s either crucial or irrelevant.

 

+1 

And we may never know.

-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Wednesday, May 20, 2015 11:42 AM

WDGF

 

 
oltmannd
...In the PTC world, all that safety critical stuff is now distributed all over creation...

 

Moving for a moment from failure senarios to vadalism or worse, doesn't this make an already somewhat vulnerable system even MORE vulnerable to attack?

 

Yep.  But the current system is pretty vunerable as it is.

-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Wednesday, May 20, 2015 12:31 PM

Dakguy201

This is an article by someone with a background in disaster management who happened to be a passenger on train 188.  In brief, it suggests the Philadelphia police and fire departments responded with the competent professionalism we hope all such organizations possess, but Amtrak performed poorly in the days following the wreck.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/05/amtrak-188-survivor-118123.html

 

Best quote in article: "Going forward, it’s pretty clear that Amtrak needs a real overhaul. However, the way to accomplish that is not to cut the budget while leaving management and board exactly as they are, but to do the reverse."

 

-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Southeast Michigan
  • 2,983 posts
Posted by Norm48327 on Wednesday, May 20, 2015 12:54 PM

oltmannd

 

 
Dakguy201

This is an article by someone with a background in disaster management who happened to be a passenger on train 188.  In brief, it suggests the Philadelphia police and fire departments responded with the competent professionalism we hope all such organizations possess, but Amtrak performed poorly in the days following the wreck.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/05/amtrak-188-survivor-118123.html

 

 

 

Best quote in article: "Going forward, it’s pretty clear that Amtrak needs a real overhaul. However, the way to accomplish that is not to cut the budget while leaving management and board exactly as they are, but to do the reverse."

 

 

Don Phillips has been saying that for years.

Norm


  • Member since
    January 2014
  • 8,221 posts
Posted by Euclid on Wednesday, May 20, 2015 1:44 PM

Norm48327
 
Euclid
(1) They are continually stressing that they heard no communication from the engineer saying his train was struck by projectiles.  This almost seems like more of Sumwalt “downplaying” the whole projectile angle of the story as if to imply that the Amtrak train was not struck by projectiles before it derailed.
 
Yet two other trains did report being hit in windshield by projectiles in the same area and almost the same time.  At least one of those reports did include the possibility of the projectiles being gunfire.  The appearance of the projectile damage on the two trains is fundamentally identical.  And while we don’t have any crewmember report of the Amtrak train being hit by projectiles, that locomotive too has a pattern of the same fundamental damage to its windshield.  If you look at close-up photos of the locomotive windshields of the three trains, the similarity is undeniable.
 
(2) I sense that this whole projectile theory is a real political hot potato, and unbearably so if the projectiles were bullets.  It opens the door to a criminal cause of the wreck for a variety of possible motives.    
 

 

 

Think real hard about number one. Something hits the windshield; are you going to talk on the radio or DUCK?

(2) It could very well be, and if so, they are not willing to make it public for valid reasons.

As Schlimm said, your conspiracy theory is getting out of hand.

 

 

Norm,
 
Regarding your reference to my point that you designate as #1:
 
I think you are missing my point. Why stress that the engineer made no report of projectiles when evidence shows, and the NTSB says, that the train was hit by projectiles?  It seems like the main point is that the train was struck; and not that the engineer failed to report it.
 
The ONLY thing that failing to make the report indicates is that no report was made.  It has nothing to do with whether or not projectiles hit the train.
 
We already know that the engineer does not recall anything during the period in which the projectiles hit the train.  We do not know why.  There may have not been time to report the projectiles before the wreck.  Or that engineer may have postponed the report for a few minutes, and never had a chance to make it before the wreck.  Or the engineer may have been incapacitated somehow and unable to make the report. 

 

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, May 20, 2015 2:01 PM

Euclid
 
The ONLY thing that failing to make the report indicates is that no report was made.  It has nothing to do with whether or not projectiles hit the train.
 
We already know that the engineer does not recall anything during the period in which the projectiles hit the train.  We do not know why.  There may have not been time to report the projectiles before the wreck.  Or that engineer may have postponed the report for a few minutes, and never had a chance to make it before the wreck.  Or the engineer may have been incapacitated somehow and unable to make the report. 

The investigation is still ongoing, and any official report on the accident will be some time off in being released. 

You are reverting back to speculation and not relying on factual information.

  • Member since
    November 2005
  • 4,190 posts
Posted by wanswheel on Wednesday, May 20, 2015 2:07 PM
Excerpt from New Jersey.com, May 19

An Amtrak conductor from Kearny made a dramatic escape from a train that derailed outside Philadelphia last week, crawling from the wreckage despite a broken neck and back, his attorney said today.

Bruce Nagel, who filed suit against Amtrak on behalf of Emilio Fonseca and his wife Leticia Oliveira on Monday, said doctors were calling the 33-year-old a "miracle man" for surviving the May 12 crash...

In spite of his injuries, Nagel said Fonseca continued to warn other passengers to avoid live electrical currents around the train once he had crawled off the tracks and into the nearby field.
"In a lot of ways, Mr. Fonseca is a hero," Nagel said.
  • Member since
    August 2005
  • 964 posts
Posted by gardendance on Wednesday, May 20, 2015 2:15 PM

Euclid, I hope when you say projectile you don't intend to mean deliberately propelled projectiles, such as from a gun. The projectiles that caused locomotive glass damage could be debris that the crash hurled.

Patrick Boylan

Free yacht rides, 27' sailboat, zip code 19114 Delaware River, get great Delair bridge photos from the river. Send me a private message

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Southeast Michigan
  • 2,983 posts
Posted by Norm48327 on Wednesday, May 20, 2015 2:16 PM

Murray:

"You are reverting back to speculation and not relying on factual information."

Bucky rely on facts? No; he just keeps going in circles hoping to prove his theory is the only correct one.

Norm


  • Member since
    January 2014
  • 8,221 posts
Posted by Euclid on Wednesday, May 20, 2015 2:21 PM

Murray
 
Euclid
 
The ONLY thing that failing to make the report indicates is that no report was made.  It has nothing to do with whether or not projectiles hit the train.
 
We already know that the engineer does not recall anything during the period in which the projectiles hit the train.  We do not know why.  There may have not been time to report the projectiles before the wreck.  Or that engineer may have postponed the report for a few minutes, and never had a chance to make it before the wreck.  Or the engineer may have been incapacitated somehow and unable to make the report. 

 

 

The investigation is still ongoing, and any official report on the accident will be some time off in being released. 

You are reverting back to speculation and not relying on factual information.

 

That is correct Murray.

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Southeast Michigan
  • 2,983 posts
Posted by Norm48327 on Wednesday, May 20, 2015 2:22 PM

gardendance

Euclid, I hope when you say projectile you don't intend to mean deliberately propelled projectiles, such as from a gun. The projectiles that caused locomotive glass damage could be debris that the crash hurled.

 

Patrick, I agree that the "projectiles" could have been debris. They also could have been something else (phaser beams perhhaps) Wink  and I'm thinking the NTSB does not want to spill the beans at this time. I'm willing to wait for factual information.

Norm


  • Member since
    September 2003
  • From: Omaha, NE
  • 10,621 posts
Posted by dehusman on Wednesday, May 20, 2015 2:24 PM

Euclid
Why stress that the engineer made no report of projectiles when evidence shows, and the NTSB says, that the train was hit by projectiles?

No, the train MAY have been hit by projectiles.  Something definitely hit the windshield.  They haven't determined if it was prior to the accident or happened during the accident.  The side of the engine was damaged by striking something (scrape marks, panel knocked off, etc.) it is also possible that the damage to the windshield occurred after it derailed and the reason the engineer doesn't remember it before the derailmnet is because he wasn't hit by "projectiles" prior to derailing.

People are speculating and then after they say a speculation ten times, people start believing their own speculations.

Personally I think the engine hit a sign, post, mile marker, switch stand or some other object as it slid across the open area and that's what impacted the window.

Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com

  • Member since
    November 2005
  • 4,190 posts
Posted by wanswheel on Wednesday, May 20, 2015 3:52 PM
Excerpts from NTSB press release, May 20
An examination of the signals systems has revealed no anomalies or malfunctions…
Investigators interviewed the engineer of the SEPTA train that had stopped after being struck by an object that had shattered the windshield of the locomotive. The SEPTA engineer said that the Amtrak engineer announced on the radio, “hot track rail two,” to let him know that the Amtrak train was about to pass the stopped SEPTA train. He saw Amtrak 188 pass on track 2 and did not notice anything unusual…
Amtrak has provided the NTSB with the engineer’s training and employment records. He had been operating trains in the Washington-Boston Northeast Corridor for about three years. He had been specifically assigned the Washington-New York segment of the corridor for several weeks.
  • Member since
    November 2006
  • From: NW Pa Snow-belt.
  • 2,216 posts
Posted by ricktrains4824 on Wednesday, May 20, 2015 11:34 PM

The SEPTA engineer did not notice anything "unusual" about Amtrak 188 as it passed him.... At what speed? Kinda hard to notice details of a car passing you doing 55MPH at night, (to prove, watch a car go by you while you stand next to the road after dark, then tell me if it was a male or female driving, and what color their hair is.... With a dark interior, you cannot, nor can you see their windshield.) let alone a train doing 70+.... And, key question, could this have occurred BEFORE any alleged projectile strikes? Just because he didn't notice anything doesn't mean it wasn't there.... Just like just because dispatch never recorded a transmission about alleged strike doesn't mean he didn't say it over the radio to his crew like they reported. 

NOTE: Nowhere am I here saying that the alleged projectile hit occurred before the crash, just pointing out it is still possible, as the NTSB has not said one way or the other as to if it did or did not. Also, it is entirely possible that the SEPTA engineer missed something, as 188 was moving by in the night. Also, were they not going the same direction? Kinda hard to see these details already, now you are having it come from behind you? (Go see that car again, but this time, have it come from behind you, and watch as it goes passed, tell me what it's windshield looks like, and male or female again. I will spot you the hair color this time though...)I do not see how it is even possible for the SEPTA engineer to even notice 188's front windshield now.... Kinda easy to miss something "unusual" in something you can't clearly see.

And, could he have been hit, and distracted from where along the line he was? Possible. At least until NTSB says it's not. 

Ricky W.

HO scale Proto-freelancer.

My Railroad rules:

1: It's my railroad, my rules.

2: It's for having fun and enjoyment.

3: Any objections, consult above rules.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • From: Omaha, NE
  • 10,621 posts
Posted by dehusman on Thursday, May 21, 2015 6:45 AM

ricktrains4824
The SEPTA engineer did not notice anything "unusual" about Amtrak 188 as it passed him

More importantly this gives us critical information.

According to the SEPTA engineer the AMTK train called him and warned him that the AMTK train was passing.

We now know that at that time, the AMTK engineer was awake.

The AMTK engineer was "situationally aware", he knew where he was, he knew where the SEPTA train was, he was aware that his train posed a risk to the other train.  AMTK called SEPTA, AMTK initiated the transmission.

We can be almost completely certain that nothing had happened to the AMTK train at that time because he communicated to another train and didn't mention any exceptions. 

What I have never seen mentined is where and when he passed the SEPTA train.  How close was it to where the derailment was?

Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • 964 posts
Posted by gardendance on Thursday, May 21, 2015 7:09 AM

If you mean the SEPTA train whose windshield was shattered, it stopped at North Philly, so Amtk 188 must have passed it by North Philly.

I'm not sure how much "risk to the other train" was involved, they were on different tracks. Are they in the habit of radioing each other as they pass in the same direction on different tracks?

Patrick Boylan

Free yacht rides, 27' sailboat, zip code 19114 Delaware River, get great Delair bridge photos from the river. Send me a private message

  • Member since
    March 2002
  • 9,265 posts
Posted by edblysard on Thursday, May 21, 2015 7:56 AM

While it may not be required by rule, warning a train crew you are going to pass beside them is normal, you don't want anyone stepping out thinking the track is clear.

23 17 46 11

  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Thursday, May 21, 2015 8:15 AM

Norm48327

 

 
oltmannd

 

 
Dakguy201

This is an article by someone with a background in disaster management who happened to be a passenger on train 188.  In brief, it suggests the Philadelphia police and fire departments responded with the competent professionalism we hope all such organizations possess, but Amtrak performed poorly in the days following the wreck.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/05/amtrak-188-survivor-118123.html

 

 

 

Best quote in article: "Going forward, it’s pretty clear that Amtrak needs a real overhaul. However, the way to accomplish that is not to cut the budget while leaving management and board exactly as they are, but to do the reverse."

 

 

 

 

Don Phillips has been saying that for years.

 

He seems to have a bug up his **** for Boardman.

-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • From: Omaha, NE
  • 10,621 posts
Posted by dehusman on Thursday, May 21, 2015 8:32 AM

gardendance

If you mean the SEPTA train whose windshield was shattered, it stopped at North Philly, so Amtk 188 must have passed it by North Philly.

I'm not sure how much "risk to the other train" was involved, they were on different tracks.

If the SEPTA train was stopping to investigate the broken window, then there is the possibility of someone being on the ground around the train, or at least focused on something other than the tracks around them.  Warning them that you will be passing by them at high speed in close proximity is the safe course.

Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com

  • Member since
    November 2013
  • 1,097 posts
Posted by Buslist on Thursday, May 21, 2015 8:43 AM

oltmannd

He seems to have a bug up his **** for Boardman.

 

 

Yup listented to him speak at NWU last year and I can support that point of view. He bitched about him the whole time.

  • Member since
    January 2014
  • 8,221 posts
Posted by Euclid on Thursday, May 21, 2015 9:14 AM
schlimm
 
Euclid
They are continually stressing that they heard no communication from the engineer saying his train was struck by projectiles.  This almost seems like more of Sumwalt “downplaying” the whole projectile angle of the story as if to imply that the Amtrak train was not struck by projectiles before it derailed.
 
Yet two other trains did report being hit in windshield by projectiles in the same area and almost the same time.  At least one of those reports did include the possibility of the projectiles being gunfire.  The appearance of the projectile damage on the two trains is fundamentally identical.  And while we don’t have any crewmember report of the Amtrak train being hit by projectiles, that locomotive too has a pattern of the same fundamental damage to its windshield.  If you look at close-up photos of the locomotive windshields of the three trains, the similarity is undeniable.
 
I sense that this whole projectile theory is a real political hot potato, and unbearably so if the projectiles were bullets.  It opens the door to a criminal cause of the wreck for a variety of possible motives.    
 

 

 

News flash:  The FBI ruled out bullet marks on the Amtrak train.   But you seem intent on weaving some conspiracy of criminals and a government cover-up so I suppose the FBI's and NTSB's statements are all part of "plausible deniability" in your tale. 

 

I have no intention of weaving a conspiracy, as you say, and I said nothing to indicate that.  I realize that the FBI concluded that the train was not hit by gunfire, and I said nothing to the contrary.  I was referring to the complete projectile theory that had been advanced and was on the table when Sumwalt “downplayed” the gunfire component last Sunday.  
 
I said this: “They are continually stressing that they heard no communication from the engineer saying his train was struck by projectiles.  This almost seems like more of Sumwalt “downplaying” the whole projectile angle of the story as if to imply that the Amtrak train was not struck by projectiles before it derailed.”
 
Then I capsulized the whole theory just for reference, and concluded that I believe it is a political hot potato, particularly if it includes gunfire.
 
Perhaps, the semantics of my comment allows you to conclude what I said to mean that I am personally advancing a theory that gunfire was involved despite the FBI finding to the contrary. That is not the case.  My theory is only about the motivation behind what we are being told by Sumwalt.  I am referring to the motivation before gunfire was ruled out, and apparently continuing after that point.     
  • Member since
    August 2005
  • 964 posts
Posted by gardendance on Thursday, May 21, 2015 9:30 AM

dehusman

 

 
gardendance

If you mean the SEPTA train whose windshield was shattered, it stopped at North Philly, so Amtk 188 must have passed it by North Philly.

I'm not sure how much "risk to the other train" was involved, they were on different tracks.

 

If the SEPTA train was stopping to investigate the broken window, then there is the possibility of someone being on the ground around the train, or at least focused on something other than the tracks around them.  Warning them that you will be passing by them at high speed in close proximity is the safe course.

 

That's IF the SEPTA train had stopped at the scene. I thought I had read that it had stopped at North Philly station. I don't remember reading anything that said it had stopped at the scene.

Of course just because I don't remember reading about it doesn't mean it didn't happen. Does anybody know how many times, when and where the damaged SEPTA train stopped, and where did AMTK 188 pass it?

Patrick Boylan

Free yacht rides, 27' sailboat, zip code 19114 Delaware River, get great Delair bridge photos from the river. Send me a private message

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Southeast Michigan
  • 2,983 posts
Posted by Norm48327 on Thursday, May 21, 2015 9:32 AM

My theory of the moment is:

After the train derailed, the engineer got out, and while cursing the situation, threw rocks at the windshield.

Makes about as much sense as some postulations. Wink

Nomex suit going on now. Hmm

Norm


  • Member since
    February 2005
  • From: Cordes Jct Ariz.
  • 1,305 posts
Posted by switch7frg on Thursday, May 21, 2015 10:56 AM

Big Smile Norm, the suit would make you very fire proof. With all the spectulation going on , some one will get the right story that will be the same as the NTSB. Then he will be saying ( I told you so) .

Y6bs evergreen in my mind

  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Thursday, May 21, 2015 11:21 AM

dehusman
The side of the engine was damaged by striking something (scrape marks, panel knocked off, etc.)

Probably the alien spacecraft with the tractor beam that pulled the train up to high speed and off the tracks. Dunce

-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    November 2005
  • 4,190 posts
Posted by wanswheel on Thursday, May 21, 2015 2:00 PM
Video of Sumwalt’s first mention of the assistant engineer who said she thought Bostian said their train also got hit (at about 4:30 in the video), has me wondering if her remark was spontaneously volunteered, or in answer to a specific question.
  • Member since
    July 2010
  • 44 posts
Posted by gp18 on Thursday, May 21, 2015 4:37 PM

"Perhaps, the semantics of my comment allows you to conclude what I said to mean that I am personally advancing a theory that gunfire was involved despite the FBI finding to the contrary. That is not the case. My theory is only about the motivation behind what we are being told by Sumwalt. I am referring to the motivation before gunfire was ruled out, and apparently continuing after that point".

This is the same FBI that didn't think foreign nationals taking flying lessons and not wanting to learn how to take off and land a 737 wasn't worth considering.

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy