Trains.com

Amtrak Wreck in Philadelphia

69567 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, January 27, 2016 8:46 AM

MrLynn
PS The NYT writer also mentions 'freights' on the NEC.  In the hours I've ridden Amtrak (c. 9 AM to 11 PM) I've never seen any on the main line; I've heard they do use the main later, when passenger traffic is minimal.

There are locals that operate during daylight hours along the NEC.  Plus, the oil trains often run during daylight between Perryville and Newark, DE.

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

  • Member since
    September 2007
  • 192 posts
Posted by MrLynn on Wednesday, January 27, 2016 8:14 AM

ricktrains4824

 

 
MrLynn

Minor point, but the author says "Engineers must be on the lookout not just for pedestrian trespassers on the rails, and errant cars and school buses and trucks at busy road crossings, but also for orange-jacketed work crews."

AFAIK, there are no grade crossings between DC and NYC.  There are some in CT.

/Mr Lynn

 

 

 

Zilch on grade crossings... The whole NEC being grade separated allowing high speed thing precludes there even being a grade crossing. (Except a couple farther north of NYC, in fact, IIRC, north of B-town.) 

And, another little note: Orange (and yellow, so as not to be prejudicial about our work crews now, as yellow jacketed work crews are just as good as their orange jacketed brethren.... Smile, Wink & Grin) jacketed work crews generally are warned about trains, and engineers and train crews are warned of what areas they will be in. Just like the timetable contains warnings about speed restricted curves.... DS warn train crews of work areas, and bulletins are issued about these locations. Regularly.

And, IIRC, most work on the NEC, when possible, is scheduled during "off-times", when few, if any at all, trains are running. Therefore, most work crews are not even seen by most train crews on NEC trackage.

So, engineers really are not looking out for any of these things on a normal basis on the NEC.  

Kinda kills the whole story now, doesn't it? 

Between NYC and Providence there are at least three grade crossings, plus one at the station at New London, which with other track conditions keeps the NEC speeds anything but 'high'.  Between Providence and Route 128 the trains can haul ass (Regionals getting up to 125 mph) if they don't get stuck behind MBTA commuters.

Last year I made three trips from Rt 128 down the Corridor (two to DC and one to Richmond) and back.  The last one (in December) there were a lot of Maintenance of Way crews out in the daytime, often with one guy holding up a 'W' ('whistle', I assume) sign--why Amtrak has to pay someone to hold a sign, I don't know.

The NEC does not extend past Boston; terminates at South Station.  The Downeaster trains to Maine run from North Station.  There has been talk of connecting South and North stations with a tunnel for decades, but it never happens.

/Mr Lynn

PS The NYT writer also mentions 'freights' on the NEC.  In the hours I've ridden Amtrak (c. 9 AM to 11 PM) I've never seen any on the main line; I've heard they do use the main later, when passenger traffic is minimal.

  • Member since
    November 2006
  • From: NW Pa Snow-belt.
  • 2,216 posts
Posted by ricktrains4824 on Tuesday, January 26, 2016 10:47 PM

MrLynn

Minor point, but the author says "Engineers must be on the lookout not just for pedestrian trespassers on the rails, and errant cars and school buses and trucks at busy road crossings, but also for orange-jacketed work crews."

AFAIK, there are no grade crossings between DC and NYC.  There are some in CT.

/Mr Lynn

 

Zilch on grade crossings... The whole NEC being grade separated allowing high speed thing precludes there even being a grade crossing. (Except a couple farther north of NYC, in fact, IIRC, north of B-town.) 

And, another little note: Orange (and yellow, so as not to be prejudicial about our work crews now, as yellow jacketed work crews are just as good as their orange jacketed brethren.... Smile, Wink & Grin) jacketed work crews generally are warned about trains, and engineers and train crews are warned of what areas they will be in. Just like the timetable contains warnings about speed restricted curves.... DS warn train crews of work areas, and bulletins are issued about these locations. Regularly.

And, IIRC, most work on the NEC, when possible, is scheduled during "off-times", when few, if any at all, trains are running. Therefore, most work crews are not even seen by most train crews on NEC trackage.

So, engineers really are not looking out for any of these things on a normal basis on the NEC.  

Kinda kills the whole story now, doesn't it? 

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 2007
  • 192 posts
Posted by MrLynn on Tuesday, January 26, 2016 10:01 PM

Minor point, but the author says "Engineers must be on the lookout not just for pedestrian trespassers on the rails, and errant cars and school buses and trucks at busy road crossings, but also for orange-jacketed work crews."

AFAIK, there are no grade crossings between DC and NYC.  There are some in CT.

/Mr Lynn

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Southeast Michigan
  • 2,983 posts
Posted by Norm48327 on Tuesday, January 26, 2016 6:20 PM

Electroliner 1935
Well written article.

Not in my estimation. Too much "fluff" and not enough stuff. While the details appear to be reasonably accurate the article was penned with the intention ot tittilating the reader.

Thanks, but I'll wait for the NTSB report.

Norm


  • Member since
    September 2010
  • 2,515 posts
Posted by Electroliner 1935 on Tuesday, January 26, 2016 4:32 PM

Well written article. 

Has Amtrak made any changes in its crew scheduling as a result of this such as extending the interval between runs?

 

  • Member since
    January 2014
  • 8,175 posts
Posted by Euclid on Tuesday, January 26, 2016 1:23 PM
wanswheel
Excerpt from NY Times Magazine, Jan. 31, 2016
 — it appears clear that in the eyes of the N.T.S.B., the key to the wreck is something investigators call “lost situational awareness.”
 
Maybe a big yellow and red sign warning about the slow curve would have helped maintain awareness of the situation. 
  • Member since
    November 2005
  • 4,190 posts
Posted by wanswheel on Tuesday, January 26, 2016 1:10 PM
Excerpt from NY Times Magazine, Jan. 31, 2016
In the first week of February, the N.T.S.B. will release the “docket” from the 188 investigation — a voluminous preliminary report comprising raw data from the train’s black box, imagery from the site and notes from investigators. Its ruling on the probable cause of the accident will most likely come this spring. Until then, the N.T.S.B. has declined to discuss its findings publicly. Still, in discussions with a range of rail officials — many of whom, citing the N.T.S.B. inquiry, declined to speak on the record — it appears clear that in the eyes of the N.T.S.B., the key to the wreck is something investigators call “lost situational awareness.”
  • Member since
    September 2007
  • 192 posts
Posted by MrLynn on Wednesday, December 30, 2015 7:04 AM

It's been a long time.  Have there been any updates on the status of the investigation?  Any word whether the engineer has regained any of his memory?

I rode NER no. 94 through the area a couple of weeks ago and didn't see any sign of the wreck. We were going about 50 mph.  I was in the business-class car right behind the engine, a nice shiny new ACS-64, and must say I had a twinge of worry.  It was the business car on train 188 that got torn up by hitting a stanchion.

/Mr Lynn

  • Member since
    November 2005
  • From: Hope, AR
  • 2,061 posts
Posted by narig01 on Friday, July 24, 2015 5:16 AM

Don Phillips in his column, in the September issue of Trains, said there was "A large hole in the windshield of the locomotive wasn't there when the train left Philadelphia". He also writes that the FBI said it wasn't from a bullet. 

 

Rgds IGN 

  • Member since
    November 2005
  • 4,190 posts
Posted by wanswheel on Saturday, July 11, 2015 1:21 AM
Excerpt from Saltz Mongeluzzi Barrett & Bendesky, July 10
 
 
Admitting its train was "traveling in excess of the allowable speed," Amtrak today, in its first legal filings in response to lawsuits resulting from the fatal May derailment in Philadelphia, also stated "it will not contest liability for compensatory damages proximately caused by the derailment of Train 188 on May 12, 2015." The answers were filed in U.S. District Court in Philadelphia in connection with the first two passenger cases filed.
 

Excerpt from NY Times, July 10

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/11/us/amtrak-will-not-fight-suits-filed-in-wreck.html?_r=0

In the reauthorization of Amtrak in 1997, Congress capped the liability against the company at $200 million for any single train accident. The provision, which does not account for inflation, was aimed at keeping railroad companies in operation when hit with major lawsuits...

“This is a good start but the liability cap remains a problem,” said Fredric Eisenberg, a Philadelphia lawyer who represents a Brooklyn couple injured in the accident. “While an admission of liability is a welcome step, Amtrak should join in our effort to raise the almost 20-year-old cap which is clearly insufficient to compensate the victims of this crash.”

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Friday, July 10, 2015 12:49 PM

tree68

 

 
schlimm
And on non-stoker equipped steam engines, the fireman was pretty busy much of the time shoveling coal - a grueling job - with no time to be a 2nd set of eyes.

 

For the Gulf Curve (Little Falls) wreck on the New York Central, there were three in the cab, including the Road Foreman of Engines.  That didn't prevent the engineer from closing the throttle (on a steam engine) as he entered the curve.  

He immediately recognized his mistake, but by then it was too late.  The train entered the 7+ degree curve at about 60 MPH, against a 45 MPH speed limit.  The service brakes had been applied before the curve, but not enough.

Never mind the speed - a major factor was the fact that unlike Diesels, I don't believe steam engines free-wheel at all well.  The engineer might as well have dumped the brakes on the locomotive.  The train continued to push, jacknifing the loco and tender, with everything else piling up behind them.

Authorities laid the cause to excessive speed, but one might wonder if the train might have made it around the curve despite the speed, if the engineer had simply reduced the throttle instead of shutting it off.

 

 

Great story!!

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 24,924 posts
Posted by tree68 on Friday, July 10, 2015 12:08 PM

schlimm
And on non-stoker equipped steam engines, the fireman was pretty busy much of the time shoveling coal - a grueling job - with no time to be a 2nd set of eyes.

For the Gulf Curve (Little Falls) wreck on the New York Central, there were three in the cab, including the Road Foreman of Engines.  That didn't prevent the engineer from closing the throttle (on a steam engine) as he entered the curve.  

He immediately recognized his mistake, but by then it was too late.  The train entered the 7+ degree curve at about 60 MPH, against a 45 MPH speed limit.  The service brakes had been applied before the curve, but not enough.

Never mind the speed - a major factor was the fact that unlike Diesels, I don't believe steam engines free-wheel at all well.  The engineer might as well have dumped the brakes on the locomotive.  The train continued to push, jacknifing the loco and tender, with everything else piling up behind them.

Authorities laid the cause to excessive speed, but one might wonder if the train might have made it around the curve despite the speed, if the engineer had simply reduced the throttle instead of shutting it off.

 

LarryWhistling
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...

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Friday, July 10, 2015 10:02 AM

daveklepper

Don't forget that in the steam days there was only one man in the cab ---on camelback locomotives, and the CNJ commuter service must have been about as stressful an environment at the NEC today.   The first PRR Atlantics, the E-1's, for Camden - Atlantic City service, high speed for the time, were camelbacks.

 

 
And on non-stoker equipped steam engines, the fireman was pretty busy much of the time shoveling coal - a grueling job - with no time to be a 2nd set of eyes.

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 24,924 posts
Posted by tree68 on Friday, July 10, 2015 9:39 AM

BaltACD

With only one man in the cab - the train must be brought to a stop for the Engineer to copy a Mandatory Directive from the Train Dispatcher.

The person at the operating controls is prohibited by rule from copying directives that are required to be written - Slow Orders etc.

This begs the question of how PTC enters into the equation.  Will a crewmember have to copy a warrant/EC1/FormD for an upcoming slow order (or the like) or will the information simply be displayed on a screen, perhaps acknowledged by entry of a password or other method of verification?

LarryWhistling
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...

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,048 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Friday, July 10, 2015 9:04 AM

Don't forget that in the steam days there was only one man in the cab ---on camelback locomotives, and the CNJ commuter service must have been about as stressful an environment at the NEC today.   The first PRR Atlantics, the E-1's, for Camden - Atlantic City service, high speed for the time, were camelbacks.

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,054 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Friday, July 10, 2015 4:45 AM

With only one man in the cab - the train must be brought to a stop for the Engineer to copy a Mandatory Directive from the Train Dispatcher.

The person at the operating controls is prohibited by rule from copying directives that are required to be written - Slow Orders etc.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    May 2013
  • 3,231 posts
Posted by NorthWest on Thursday, July 9, 2015 11:34 PM

In my opinion, if cameras are installed, they should only be pulled for review if an incident occurs, just like the various event recorders on planes and locomotives. If there are not rules prohibiting them from becoming a 'gotcha' tool, then I forsee installation being a very long, drawn out and contentious process.

  • Member since
    September 2010
  • 2,515 posts
Posted by Electroliner 1935 on Thursday, July 9, 2015 8:30 PM

[quote user="schlimm"]

4. A "second set of eyes" in the cab does not appear to add to concentration and safety.  It may even be a distraction.

 I have never forgotten the trip in the PRR Cincinnati- Chicago E-8 cab one morning where the fireman had been at a union meeting the previous evening and was (to a young 23 year old college student on his co-op job in the S & C department who was riding to Richmond IN. ) much more of a distraction to the Engineer than a help. Never called a signal, never looked back over the train, just ranted about all the injustices that were taking place. I kept my mouth shut but never forgot it. 
  • Member since
    September 2010
  • 2,515 posts
Posted by Electroliner 1935 on Thursday, July 9, 2015 8:20 PM

[quote user="Paul of Covington"]

  An inward facing camera in the cab may help determine the cause of the accident after it happens; a second operator in the cab may help prevent the accident.  Granted, with two people in the cab, complacency may set in.   ("If I doze off for a minute, my partner will take care of things.")   Also, they may be distracted by conversation between them.    However if the cameras are expected to catch sleep problems or other health issues before accidents occur, someone is going to have to monitor them constantly, or at least in a high proportion  of cases, which means manpower almost equal to the extra set of operators.

 

My problem with the rational of the second man in the cab idea is that while it may help, it doesn't always prevent accidents as it should. I keep thinking of the two men in the cab of a CNJ commuter train. As stated in this Wikipedia article:

(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newark_Bay_rail_accident)

"The Newark Bay rail accident occurred on September 15, 1958 in Newark BayNew Jersey. A Central Railroad of New Jersey (CRRNJ) morning commuter train, #3314, ran through a restrictive and a stop signalderailed, and slid off the openNewark Bay lift bridge. Both diesel locomotives and the first two coaches plunged into Newark Bay and sank immediately, killing 48 people."

The engineer and the fireman both died. Why they BOTH ignored two signals is unknown. I.m sure other examples exist. 

"An autopsy found that the engineer, 63-year-old Lloyd Wilburn, had indications of hypertensive heart disease, but that he had died of asphyxia due to drowning. However, no reason could be found to explain why fireman Peter Andrew, 42, could not or did not stop the train."

Meanwhile, Amtrak has operated thousands of trips on the corridor and Metra in Chicago operates thousands of trips succesfully with only one person in the cab. 

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 24,924 posts
Posted by tree68 on Thursday, July 9, 2015 8:13 PM

schlimm
4. A "second set of eyes" in the cab does not appear to add to concentration and safety.  It may even be a distraction.

So, what did you think of the game last night? .....

LarryWhistling
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...

  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: Allentown, PA
  • 9,810 posts
Posted by Paul_D_North_Jr on Thursday, July 9, 2015 7:29 PM

I've commented elsewhere that most passenger transportation operating personnel - engineers as here, aircraft pilots, ferryboat and cruise ship captains, bus drivers, etc. - have the lives of many people in their hands in the normal course of their work.  But a surgeon usually has just 1 life in his hands most of the time (OK, maybe another 1 or 2 - max. - if a pregnancy, etc. is involved).  If the surgeon screws up, then that's the maximum 'exposure' to a loss of life or injury; if the transportation person screws up, it could be hundreds of lives.  (Lawyers, it depends - other than death penalty cases, the most that's at stake is many years in prison - but again, usually just 1 person at a time; otherwise, just money is usually at stake.) 

Yet, surgeons are treated like gods on this earth with regard to pay, perks, and scheduling - long hours sometimes, but few overnight shifts (except in the ER).  Airplane pilots used to be not far behind - think of the maximum hours of work per month, etc. - then the captains of big ships, and little ones.  Near the bottom of the heap are the railroad engineers, and at the very bottom are bus drivers - working all kinds of different hours, variable schedules, often the sole person in charge most of the time, though with average to above average pay, but nothing like the surgeon or pilots.

Seems to me that the priorities and consideration for the responsibilties are somewhat backwards here.  It's another variation of the old saying: "A society that does not value its plumbers as much as its philosophers will have neither good plumbing nor good philosophy."

- Paul North.    

"This Fascinating Railroad Business" (title of 1943 book by Robert Selph Henry of the AAR)
  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,054 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Thursday, July 9, 2015 5:57 PM

schlimm

Why should railroaders be treated any differently than bank clerks, retail salespeople, lawyers in court or many surgeons in surgery?   AFAIK, few lives depend on the vigilence of clerks or salespeople, but inattention by engineers can lead to disasters.  BTW, railroad engineers are not categorized as professionals, i.e., belonging to a recognized profession.

And so called 'Professionals' must really be amatures as they only practice their trade.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Thursday, July 9, 2015 5:53 PM

Wizlish
It's not really different from the feeling a clerk gets when they realize that the downward-facing 'security camera' over each cash drawer is not there to record how many Benjamins an armed robber pulls from it.  Railroaders are professionals.  They don't like being told they aren't trusted, and they already know about the enormous amounts of Mickey Mouse 'disciplline' and consequences they will get from these cameras for every 'legitimate' catch of a developing accident situation or whatever that the system produces.  They also know, or ought to know, that every little problem or lapse produced over time can, perhaps will, be stored and perhaps used to back up an unrelated disciplinary decision ... or to help get rid of someone unpopular, or someone who has made an enemy of someone with higher nominal authority -- or control over the bureaucracy that administers the security-camera system.

Why should railroaders be treated any differently than bank clerks, retail salespeople, lawyers in court or many surgeons in surgery?   AFAIK, few lives depend on the vigilence of clerks or salespeople, but inattention by engineers can lead to disasters.  BTW, railroad engineers are not categorized as professionals, i.e., belonging to a recognized profession.

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    July 2010
  • From: Louisiana
  • 2,302 posts
Posted by Paul of Covington on Thursday, July 9, 2015 4:31 PM

  An inward facing camera in the cab may help determine the cause of the accident after it happens; a second operator in the cab may help prevent the accident.  Granted, with two people in the cab, complacency may set in.   ("If I doze off for a minute, my partner will take care of things.")   Also, they may be distracted by conversation between them.    However if the cameras are expected to catch sleep problems or other health issues before accidents occur, someone is going to have to monitor them constantly, or at least in a high proportion  of cases, which means manpower almost equal to the extra set of operators.

_____________ 

  "A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner

  • Member since
    October 2014
  • 1,644 posts
Posted by Wizlish on Thursday, July 9, 2015 4:12 PM

I think a large part of this is human reaction to being spied on -- for watever good reason, or defendable business purpose, or strict (and ingenious) weaselly testing for strict compliance with important safety rules and principles.

It's not really different from the feeling a clerk gets when they realize that the downward-facing 'security camera' over each cash drawer is not there to record how many Benjamins an armed robber pulls from it.  Railroaders are professionals.  They don't like being told they aren't trusted, and they already know about the enormous amounts of Mickey Mouse 'disciplline' and consequences they will get from these cameras for every 'legitimate' catch of a developing accident situation or whatever that the system produces.  They also know, or ought to know, that every little problem or lapse produced over time can, perhaps will, be stored and perhaps used to back up an unrelated disciplinary decision ... or to help get rid of someone unpopular, or someone who has made an enemy of someone with higher nominal authority -- or control over the bureaucracy that administers the security-camera system.

I have been working on a potential answer to this situation.  The inward-facing cameras should be the property of the enginemen, or should be assigned to their custody as railroad pocket watches once were -- the crew can't open them or tinker with them, but no one else can either (only the tech guy who services them between shifts).  The camera then runs on a time loop, albeit a longer one than typical accident event recorders would use, but the engineman retains the 'copyright' to the material on the camera, and only turns it over for review if formally subpoena'd -- in order to prevent fishing expeditions.  If the camera 'mysteriously' stops working or is blank for critical times, consequences follow... just as they will when the 'mandatory' inward-facing cameras start to show their mysterious failures, blurriness, lapses and corruption in stored data, etc.

Dispatcher and anyone else with authority can access the feed from the 'second pair of eyes' -- but they have to request specific permission to do it each time, and must do it with the knowledge and consent of the engineman, rather than sneakily tapping in or intercepting the data feed.  Sure, you can mandate that the engineer answer a call, just as you can mandate that he turn on the radio microphone and communicate with the dispatcher.  But you don't have to mandate that crews inherently have no privacy rights and can be spied on at any time -- there is apparently far too much of that in railroading already.

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Thursday, July 9, 2015 10:49 AM

Total: 56 deaths; 230 injuries;  $96.75 million damages in 12 accidents in which the NTSB started recommending inward/outward cameras, not including Frankford Jct..

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Thursday, July 9, 2015 10:39 AM

I realize operating personnel are adamantly opposed to inward facing cameras, but:

1.  Such cameras would quickly show previously undiagnosed neurological/medical problems, such as OSA, seizures, ADHD, etc.

2.  With many lives at stake on various passenger trains, the public will (rightfully, IMO) demand this.  Whether or not freight train usage would follow is a separate issue.

3.  Being observed at work is what most workers have to accept as a normal part of employment. It is not an intrusion into one's personal privacy.  Railroad workers' comments about "weed weasels" are telling.

4. A "second set of eyes" in the cab does not appear to add to concentration and safety.  It may even be a distraction.

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    November 2005
  • 4,190 posts
Posted by wanswheel on Thursday, July 9, 2015 10:36 AM
NTSB doesn’t doubt they will determine the probable cause. Excerpt from letter to FRA, July 8
…During interviews, the engineer of Amtrak 188 stated that he could not recall the events leading up to the derailment. So far, investigators have been unable to determine specific information about the engineer’s behavior while the train was accelerating in the moments before the derailment. The Amtrak 188 accident in Philadelphia is only the latest example where the engineer’s recollection of events is limited, and inward-facing recorders could have provided valuable information as NTSB determines the probable cause of this tragic accident.
  • Member since
    January 2014
  • 8,175 posts
Posted by Euclid on Thursday, July 9, 2015 9:01 AM
This is exactly what I expected, and as I predicted earlier, I expect that the NTSB will reinforce this agenda for inward facing cameras by saying that they are unable to determine the cause of this wreck because there were no inward cameras.

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