I think I have mentioned this before, but do not confuse the 'three seconds to recognize an open facing-point switch' with the 'three seconds from mushroom-button emergency to collision'. They are two completely different things.
Again, it may help to understand the sequence of events if you review the equipment on a P42. The 'blended braking' system is designed to make the shortest possible service stop when the lever is moved. The emergency control, which can't be disabled once pressed, applies full possible braking. Both systems drop the engine to an appropriate speed when selected; I would assume that they disable 'forward power' to the traction-motor control system almost immediately whether or not the prime mover is kept at higher speed for the dynamic part of blended braking. (I am assuming NTSB will show all this and not just 'throttle position' in their first informed report.)
Without a full timeline of locomotive-control events starting probably at relevant CP passage, we can't have any particular rational discussion about who did what when. It is particularly unfortunate that we will have so little understanding of what the engineer thought to do in this interval; it will mostly be from what we see on the inward-facing camera, and frankly I have little trust this will have actually produced meaningful results here; it certainly doesn't seem to have done so in Amtrak wrecks since 188.
Another point that might be kept in mind is that braking 'curves' are the way they are because fixed braking effort, including full emergency, will produce higher relative deceleration at lower speeds. Good drivers recognize this directly as they slow for lights and stops; you can see it very dramatically in the video of the LRC near-collision (where, moreover, even a trained railroader misunderstands the closing deceleration rate).
So the effective speed, and hence momentum transfer, at the point of collision will be proportionally and not directly less with earlier reaction, which I think is the point Euclid is making. As I've said before, we need better data on the effective 'braking curve' of 91's consist on that track profile to make more than an educated guess about deceleration rate, and there are other factors that may be involved. But as Big Jim pointed out, you'd be surprised how fast you can come to a stop if you don't care about flat wheels, and much of the reduction of distance comes in the last seconds of time.
EuclidAs I said, I think 250 feet is a fair minimum, and it could be up to 500 feet or more. At night, an open switch shows a prominent black shadow in contrast to the headlight gleam on the rails. That shadow stands out because it diverges where the curved stock rail passes the open switch point. I have never measured the site distance, but on a railroad track, things look closer than they actually are.
I'm still curious where you gained this expereince from.
It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any
edblysardThe fastest an emergency brake application will occur is the speed of sound.
Not on Amtrak equipment, which activates the brakes on the train at about 93% of the speed of light. Setup to full cylinder pressure involves mass flow and of course is slower than 'sonic', but is still very quick on this equipment and occurs substantially in parallel.
I do not know directly what equipment is activated when the emergency button on a P42 is engaged; perhaps someone with appropriate technical information will provide it.
When those of you who want to argue over how many verses you can engrave on a pin head get done, let us not forget that there are two men who died doing their job are dead and had about five seconds to realize that they were going to die. The rules are there because others before them have died. The rules allow operation of trains but require others to perform acts that keep the trains safe. If everyone had done their job according to the rules, Amtrak 91 would not be in the news. Unless this was deliberate sabotage, or vandalism, someone failed to follow the rules. This we will learn when the STB provides additional information. I for one ask that the nit picking over how far away an open switch can be observed and whether the engineer shoulda, woulda, coulda reacted faster, differently, or othe issues stop. It has become childish, repetative and meaningless. To some, it may be fun, but not to me. It reminds me of children arguing over who got the bigger piece of cake. Whether it would have been possible to see an open switch has no meaningful result. If you can see an improperly aligned switch, at a speed greater than about 20 mph (just a number I chose, you can but please don't pick another just for the sake of arguing) you still are not going to stop before going through it. And at higher speeds it is worse. So lets say prayers for those who have died and respect those who are operating the trains to the best of their ability. and follow the rules.
Well said, Electroliner.
_____________
"A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner
Beside question at which distance the misaligned switch was visible how early were the parked CSX locomotive visible?
Is it possible that the Amtrak crew realized the misaligned train, gave a three second horn signal to warn the people of a rough ride through the switch and only then recognized the CSX locomotive and applied the emergency brake?Regards, Volker
Cotton Belt MP104amen, and to add to the insensitivity of the subject there have been discussions/arguments about airlines customer service, getting drunk and playing wack a mole sad those who argue for argument sake let'em dry out in the wind = no resposce they tire when no counter argument is given endmrw0210181421
You know, some of us discussing the issues (and injecting silliness) are the same ones that run trains in dark territory. So, yes we understand the issues as it could happen to us.
OvermodWithout a full timeline of locomotive-control events starting probably at relevant CP passage, we can't have any particular rational discussion about who did what when.
The NTSB has not provided adequate information for a detailed sequence of events, but they have provided several markers with which one can fill in addional information. Like Sumwalt said, "You can do your own math." For instance, with speed and time before impact, one can determine distance. That should be reasonably accurate, given the relatively short intervals. Sumwalt's abbreviated timeline goes back 7 seconds prior to impact. That would seem to place it about 100-200 feet into the siding from the switch, depending on where the situplated 659 feet was measured from.
VOLKER LANDWEHR Beside question at which distance the misaligned switch was visible how early were the parked CSX locomotive visible? Is it possible that the Amtrak crew realized the misaligned train, gave a three second horn signal to warn the people of a rough ride through the switch and only then recognized the CSX locomotive and applied the emergency brake?Regards, Volker
I think that is possible. I would consider the open switch alone to be the emergency.
VOLKER LANDWEHRBeside question at which distance the misaligned switch was visible how early were the parked CSX locomotive visible? Is it possible that the Amtrak crew realized the misaligned train, gave a three second horn signal to warn the people of a rough ride through the switch and only then recognized the CSX locomotive and applied the emergency brake? Regards, Volker
While immaterial, it is possible. It is thinking good things that may be atributed to the engineer. But isn't this continuing the discussion of "what ifs" that keep us chasing our tails and have little of significance.
EuclidSumwalt's abbreviated timeline goes back 7 seconds prior to impact. That would seem to place it about 100-200 feet into the siding from the switch, depending on where the stipulated 659 feet was measured from.
That is correct, but what I'm referring to would include the timeline back to around the supposed release of authority by the CSX crew, nominally in accord with the terms of EO 24, and then the unrestricted reassignment of authority to 91 sometime later.
The disparcher's timeline is one of the critical things that needs to be carefully resolved. In no small part because, no matter how it resolves, it's something where positive action is still relevant to future safety.
It's part of human nature to try to find ways that damage or danger could have been mitigated 'if only' different choices had been taken. It's not "wrong" to discuss some of them, as long as we don't start blaming the dead who can't defend themselves. But I think it's better to look at ways this situation could be prevented 'in future' including perhaps different practical decisions in train handling.
zugmannYou know, some of us discussing the issues (and injecting silliness) are the same ones that run trains in dark territory.
And in the snow, where the only indication of switch position is the target.
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...
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
tree68And in the snow, where the only indication of switch position is the target.
If the snow isn't too deep.
Murphy Siding Off the top of my head I am able to list 26 forum members that are current or former railroaders. Ten of those have been active in this thread. I believe they are much more knowledgable about this topic than people with zero railroad experience like me, or like Euclid.
Speak for yourself. You know nothing about my experience background.
OvermodBut I think it's better to look at ways this situation could be prevented 'in future' including perhaps different practical decisions in train handling. Add Quote to your Post
By who, the Amtrak crew was operating under the authority given to them and operating at the authorized speed. I don't think there is any train handling issue there. The CSX freight crew parked their freight. And cleared up their authority. But did they incorrectly fail to leave the switch lined for the main. Is this what you are calling train handling? By the Dispatcher who accepted the clearance and then gave the authority to #91's crew. He doesn't "handle" a train. Your question confuses me. Please rephrase it.
EuclidSpeak for yourself. You know nothing about my experience background.
Well, some of your lack of background is obvious. Not that it matters. Lot of things I don't know about, either.
zugmann Euclid Speak for yourself. You know nothing about my experience background. Well, some of your lack of background is obvious. Not that it matters.
Euclid Speak for yourself. You know nothing about my experience background.
Well, some of your lack of background is obvious. Not that it matters.
There are those that will believe anything.
And you could provide it but won't. Does it have any hands on railroad component?
Let's put it this way, for now. This is likely far from the last time a train runs improperly or unexpectedly through a facing-point switch, regardless of EOs or the best rules procedures crews can remember (and to paraphrase 1066 and all that, any other rules defeat themselves). It appears from the initial telemetry that a different sequence of control actions may have resulted in lower impact forces; this matter bears further thought and study independent of the 'facts' of this particular wreck. I agree that shoulda-woulda-coulda here is, at best, part of the 'dealing with grief' steps between denial and acceptance. But wisdom for 'the next time' is important, too.
For some of the righteous indignant judges here, who seem to be complaining about lack of apparent compassion, these dead had names but so far you haven't seen fit to call their memory as men instead of job descriptions. For almost a week now. For the record, the 'engineer' is Michael Kempf, and the 'conductor' is Michael Cella. May they rest in peace, and someday their families feel less grief. And may we work the best we can to keep other men and women and their families from a similar horror.
Dude, calm down. Nobody is telling you to shut up.
Cotton Belt MP104Murphy Siding Off the top of my head I am able to list 26 forum members that are current or former railroaders. Ten of those have been active in this thread. I believe they are much more knowledgable about this topic than people with zero railroad experience like me, or like Euclid. Point well taken although not in the forum rules recently posted. This forum is only for you 26 active RR guys. We should shut up an listen. Oh yes I did read from the very first page of this 11 page list, but I forgot, we non active RR guys have no business w/opinions. I will try to keep them to myself. By the way to show my concern and research ……. Yeah what a bummer when a switch was vandalized and there was a recording of the mysterious person who did so. I quoted the FRA investigation. Last point, I was crew carrier for a while and carried many of you active guys that had been relieved because of fatal grade crossings. Don’t DARE impugn my sympathy for the working RR crew endmrw0210181502 sad overmod one more respected blogger comic relief not now please ooops I forgot guess ur one of the acceptable bloggers and I am not sorry
As a further note: most of the 'action' here will be, as I continue to try to establish, between the CSX crew and the dispatcher. I have seen one potentially explaining rumor (which I hesitated to post here) that a signal-department employee may have been present at the switch around this time and 'might' have said something to the CSX crew along the lines of "I've got it". If this is so, it calls for an immediate revision of the EO 24 form to include signatures of ALL persons responsible for the switch, or at least addition of a section that lets the crew delegate responsibility to certain kinds of worker BUT only after giving full and unconfined notice to the dispatcher that the switch MUST be considered in the most restricting sense until further documented release by the worker(s) assuming responsibility.
Euclid Murphy Siding Off the top of my head I am able to list 26 forum members that are current or former railroaders. Ten of those have been active in this thread. I believe they are much more knowledgable about this topic than people with zero railroad experience like me, or like Euclid. Speak for yourself. You know nothing about my experience background.
.
Cotton Belt MP104Please do not forget MY POINT, deadly serious discussion = silly injection points = lost respect for the point of discussion in my view Zugman, Tree68 you guys are, in my personal opinion, on the list of prolific, competent, good posters. I learn very interesting stuff here. It is so boring to see personal back and forth, but that is okay, ‘cause we are friends, with a common interest. It is infuriating to see demeaning comments, chill. I will go on to say “disrespectful” kinda approaches the area I was complaining about HOWEVER: Posted by zugmann on Saturday, February 10, 2018 2:24 PM “You know, some of us discussing the issues are the same ones that run trains in dark territory. So, yes we understand the issues as it could happen to us.” Electroliner said it well …… this is deadly serious …….. therefore your discussion of dark territory is deadly serious, but as HE pointed out, I agree, NO ROOM for any kind of silliness. No offense meant just a thought to impart on this sad/serious story endmrw0219181443 Please do not forget MY POINT, deadly serious discussion = silly injection points = lost respect for the point of discussion in my view Zugman, Tree68 you guys are, in my personal opinion, on the list of prolific, competent, good posters. I learn very interesting stuff here. It is so boring to see personal back and forth, but that is okay, ‘cause we are friends, with a common interest. It is infuriating to see demeaning comments, chill. I will go on to say “disrespectful” kinda approaches the area I was complaining about HOWEVER: Posted by zugmann on Saturday, February 10, 2018 2:24 PM “You know, some of us discussing the issues are the same ones that run trains in dark territory. So, yes we understand the issues as it could happen to us.” Electroliner said it well …… this is deadly serious …….. therefore your discussion of dark territory is deadly serious, but as HE pointed out, I agree, NO ROOM for any kind of silliness. No offense meant just a thought to impart on this sad/serious story endmrw0219181443Please do not forget MY POINT, deadly serious discussion = silly injection points = lost respect for the point of discussion in my view Zugman, Tree68 you guys are, in my personal opinion, on the list of prolific, competent, good posters. I learn very interesting stuff here. It is so boring to see personal back and forth, but that is okay, ‘cause we are friends, with a common interest. It is infuriating to see demeaning comments, chill. I will go on to say “disrespectful” kinda approaches the area I was complaining about HOWEVER: Posted by zugmann on Saturday, February 10, 2018 2:24 PM “You know, some of us discussing the issues are the same ones that run trains in dark territory. So, yes we understand the issues as it could happen to us.” Electroliner said it well …… this is deadly serious …….. therefore your discussion of dark territory is deadly serious, but as HE pointed out, I agree, NO ROOM for any kind of silliness. No offense meant just a thought to impart on this sad/serious story endmrw0219181443
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.