Electroliner 1935 I have a number of thoughts about this accident that I have Angst over. Two men died through no fault of their own. Their families and friend have a need to be able to morn without the facetious or snarky comments on here. Engineer tried to stop but there was insufficient time. I can't imagine the last thoughts of the engineer or conductor. I believe their death was instantanious. I expect the crew of the freight train must be torn over what happened and why (my presuption here) they failed to reline the switch for the main track. I will wait for the STB's report on what failed and allowed the train to be operated expecting a clear path between CP's. I have not yet seen any pictures of the front of the Amtrak locomotive.
I have a number of thoughts about this accident that I have Angst over. Two men died through no fault of their own. Their families and friend have a need to be able to morn without the facetious or snarky comments on here. Engineer tried to stop but there was insufficient time. I can't imagine the last thoughts of the engineer or conductor. I believe their death was instantanious.
I expect the crew of the freight train must be torn over what happened and why (my presuption here) they failed to reline the switch for the main track. I will wait for the STB's report on what failed and allowed the train to be operated expecting a clear path between CP's.
I have not yet seen any pictures of the front of the Amtrak locomotive.
Still in training.
7j43kDo YOU check switch alignment ahead of you? Every time? On a mainline run? Using only your headlights? If YOU had been on the front of 91, would YOU have seen the misaligned switch? Do YOU check EVERY switch you approach?
We are required to call out all facing point main track switches on the air. This is generally based on the signal target. While the target may be visible from a distance, the actual position of the points may not be as obvious from any distance, especially if there is a curve involved or some other obstruction (snow, anyone) exists.
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...
Overmod NDG has posted a Canadian accident report in the String Lining thread that has many similarities with this accident. Take particular note of the table that shows sequential time, brake-pipe pressure, and speed. This with an F40 pulling LRC coaches, almost certainly faster-responding to a brake application than what 91's consist provided. I think Euclid is right insofar as keeping a careful eye on the switches as you encounter them, and reacting as quickly as possible when you see one mislined. Big Jim, who has considerable experience, has said much the same thing. However, to think you will get any particular 'way' off the train even with optimal reaction time before you encounter the switch is silly; in fact, even if we were to assume that 91's engineer applied the emergency 'first', rather than the blended brake ... and I'm sure passenger engineers here understand reasons why he would not ... it's doubtful that the train would have lost much additional speed. Euclid is correct that decreasing the impact force might have been a Good Thing; he will be correct when he gets around to making the point that if the locomotive or part of the train had derailed on the switch it might not even have come into contact with the bridge or the standing CSX consist, and I'd give both head-end crew a significant chance of survival in that case. (Whether there would be more casualties back in the train if it left the rails and piled up does not seem to concern him that much, although it probably should.) I don't think we'll ever quite find out what the post-accident 'strategy' that involved keeping power on the engine even several seconds after negotiating the switch was. We certainly know they didn't go to full emergency until seeing the grinning skull of Death through the bridge portal, by which time even Euclid would have to assume no amount of brake and no superhero reaction time would have helped. I have seen reports that the accident track was a full siding, with a similar switch back onto the main some distance back. It seems at least plausible that the engine crew thought they had been mistakenly lined through the switch onto empty track by dispatcher mistake, and had sufficient time to stop without shaking up the passengers any worse than going through the switch already had. That is consistent with what NTSB has reported so far. I am sick at heart that we cannot know firsthand. May it have been as quick and relatively painless as our 'experts' keep telling us.
NDG has posted a Canadian accident report in the String Lining thread that has many similarities with this accident.
Take particular note of the table that shows sequential time, brake-pipe pressure, and speed. This with an F40 pulling LRC coaches, almost certainly faster-responding to a brake application than what 91's consist provided.
I think Euclid is right insofar as keeping a careful eye on the switches as you encounter them, and reacting as quickly as possible when you see one mislined. Big Jim, who has considerable experience, has said much the same thing. However, to think you will get any particular 'way' off the train even with optimal reaction time before you encounter the switch is silly; in fact, even if we were to assume that 91's engineer applied the emergency 'first', rather than the blended brake ... and I'm sure passenger engineers here understand reasons why he would not ... it's doubtful that the train would have lost much additional speed.
Euclid is correct that decreasing the impact force might have been a Good Thing; he will be correct when he gets around to making the point that if the locomotive or part of the train had derailed on the switch it might not even have come into contact with the bridge or the standing CSX consist, and I'd give both head-end crew a significant chance of survival in that case. (Whether there would be more casualties back in the train if it left the rails and piled up does not seem to concern him that much, although it probably should.)
I don't think we'll ever quite find out what the post-accident 'strategy' that involved keeping power on the engine even several seconds after negotiating the switch was. We certainly know they didn't go to full emergency until seeing the grinning skull of Death through the bridge portal, by which time even Euclid would have to assume no amount of brake and no superhero reaction time would have helped.
I have seen reports that the accident track was a full siding, with a similar switch back onto the main some distance back. It seems at least plausible that the engine crew thought they had been mistakenly lined through the switch onto empty track by dispatcher mistake, and had sufficient time to stop without shaking up the passengers any worse than going through the switch already had. That is consistent with what NTSB has reported so far. I am sick at heart that we cannot know firsthand. May it have been as quick and relatively painless as our 'experts' keep telling us.
Then to this interval, I added the time/distance from the switch to the freight engine. Thus, for that total trackage, from first seeing the switch wrong to point of impact, I calculated it to be approximately 11.34 seconds or 909 feet.
Euclid And as you say, the points are usually easier to see under headlight illumination at night than during the daylight.
LOL
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
Euclid Murphy Siding Euclid I am indeed asking what the definitive action on the part of the engineer should be. I don’t expect everyone to agree. I know what I would do. You have 3 seconds. What would you do? Oops! Too late. This is what I would do. I would always look at every switch as I approached it and determine which way it is lined as early as possible. Even before seeing which way the switch is lined, I would plan on the need to make an emergency application. Then if I were to see a wrongly lined switch, I would immediately make an emergency application. My process for assimilation of the open switch and the making of the emergency application would take less than one second.
Murphy Siding Euclid I am indeed asking what the definitive action on the part of the engineer should be. I don’t expect everyone to agree. I know what I would do. You have 3 seconds. What would you do? Oops! Too late.
Euclid I am indeed asking what the definitive action on the part of the engineer should be. I don’t expect everyone to agree. I know what I would do.
I am indeed asking what the definitive action on the part of the engineer should be. I don’t expect everyone to agree. I know what I would do.
You have 3 seconds. What would you do? Oops! Too late.
OK. I'll try to pretend this is sincere and not be (too) sarcastic. So, you would be sitting stiffly in the engineer’s seat with your eyes intently watching the track for the next signal. Your hand would be on the brake lever, ready hit the brakes in a split second. The very instance that you saw the that a switch was wrong you would hit brakes. I see several things wrong with your theory.
I don’t think anyone could sit for that long with a laser-like focus out the windshield
You’d have 1000 distractions, anywhere from your conductor asking you a question to scratching an itch. All those normal distractions would break your concentration.
I don’t think anyone could react in only one second. Even if you were at an arcade playing Whack-A-Mole and expecting something to pop up, your mind would take more than one second to process what’s going on and to react.
I don’t know if they’d pass you in engineer school if you were forsaking everything else in the cab in order to focus on the switch down the track.
I doubt anyone would want to work with you if that was your habit.
If you could, through super-human ability react in one second, you’d still be only two seconds away from impact.
How much braking would the train do in the two seconds left? In conclusion, I’d say you’re living in a dream world if you think you could have done any better than the engineer did. To suggest otherwise is kind of an insult to professional railroaders.
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
OvermodI have seen reports that the accident track was a full siding, with a similar switch back onto the main some distance back. It seems at least plausible that the engine crew thought they had been mistakenly lined through the switch onto empty track by dispatcher mistake
If it was a controlled siding in CTC territory, this would be plausible. But, it wasn't. It's an uncontrolled siding with a circuit controller and electric lock.
If the signal system was on, and the switch was reversed, the previous block signal would be at stop.
I can't imagine any circumstance where a dispatcher would have a guy on the ground throw and lock both turnouts and then forget to put it in the track warrant.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
I'm better at whack a mole when I'm drunk
TREE68:
What was the year and location of the NYC Gulf Curve Wreck? Was that the same as the 1940 Little Falls, NY wreck?
Ed Burns
Happily retired professional railroader from Minneapolis.
Murphy SidingYou’d have 1000 distractions, anywhere from your conductor asking you a question to scratching an itch. All those normal distractions would break your concentration.
Check your air, your speed, the load meter, answer the radio...
Randy Stahl I'm better at whack a mole when I'm drunk
And that's how you got banned from the pet store.
NP EddieWhat was the year and location of the NYC Gulf Curve Wreck? Was that the same as the 1940 Little Falls, NY wreck?
One in the same.
zugmann Randy Stahl I'm better at whack a mole when I'm drunk And that's how you got banned from the pet store.
Moles are animals ??
Randy StahlMoles are animals ??
Don't make fun of my emotional support mole.
Not making fun of, just saying I'm quite good at whacking them when I'm drunk.
Randy Stahl Not making fun of, just saying I'm quite good at whacking them when I'm drunk.
...nah, I won't. Too easy.
zugmann Randy Stahl Not making fun of, just saying I'm quite good at whacking them when I'm drunk. ...nah, I won't. Too easy.
Doesn't matter , the whole point of the post was to see how many people had me on ignore.
Randy StahlNot making fun of, just saying I'm quite good at whacking them when I'm drunk.
I'll keep you in mind next time I have a burrowing rodent problem. I'll supply the bat and adult beverages...
Now back to your regular programming.
Murphy Siding Euclid Murphy Siding Euclid I am indeed asking what the definitive action on the part of the engineer should be. I don’t expect everyone to agree. I know what I would do. You have 3 seconds. What would you do? Oops! Too late. This is what I would do. I would always look at every switch as I approached it and determine which way it is lined as early as possible. Even before seeing which way the switch is lined, I would plan on the need to make an emergency application. Then if I were to see a wrongly lined switch, I would immediately make an emergency application. My process for assimilation of the open switch and the making of the emergency application would take less than one second. OK. I'll try to pretend this is sincere and not be (too) sarcastic. So, you would be sitting stiffly in the engineer’s seat with your eyes intently watching the track for the next signal. Your hand would be on the brake lever, ready hit the brakes in a split second. The very instance that you saw the that a switch was wrong you would hit brakes. I see several things wrong with your theory. I don’t think anyone could sit for that long with a laser-like focus out the windshield You’d have 1000 distractions, anywhere from your conductor asking you a question to scratching an itch. All those normal distractions would break your concentration. I don’t think anyone could react in only one second. Even if you were at an arcade playing Whack-A-Mole and expecting something to pop up, your mind would take more than one second to process what’s going on and to react. I don’t know if they’d pass you in engineer school if you were forsaking everything else in the cab in order to focus on the switch down the track. I doubt anyone would want to work with you if that was your habit. If you could, through super-human ability react in one second, you’d still be only two seconds away from impact. How much braking would the train do in the two seconds left? In conclusion, I’d say you’re living in a dream world if you think you could have done any better than the engineer did. To suggest otherwise is kind of an insult to professional railroaders.
1) I never said I could have done better than the engineer did. I never suggested it. All I said is what I would have done. And no professional railroaders would be insulted by what I said. These ideas are all in your head and you always project them onto everything I say here. It goes back to the time when you accused me of driving off all of the professional railroaders.
2) How do you come up with two seconds for braking? One second would be to react and make the application, and there would be about ten seconds left.
3) There is no need to maintain laser-like focus on the track in order to spot any switches that show up. Engineers are supposed to know where they are at all times. Certainly they are expected to know where all mainline switches are. So when you know one is coming up, you watch for it.
4) Why do you think it not possible to make an emergency application in one second? A lot can happen in one second. How long would it take you to make an emergency application?
5) If you have 1000 distractions going on, you are doing something wrong.
Euclid Murphy Siding Euclid Murphy Siding Euclid I am indeed asking what the definitive action on the part of the engineer should be. I don’t expect everyone to agree. I know what I would do. You have 3 seconds. What would you do? Oops! Too late. This is what I would do. I would always look at every switch as I approached it and determine which way it is lined as early as possible. Even before seeing which way the switch is lined, I would plan on the need to make an emergency application. Then if I were to see a wrongly lined switch, I would immediately make an emergency application. My process for assimilation of the open switch and the making of the emergency application would take less than one second. OK. I'll try to pretend this is sincere and not be (too) sarcastic. So, you would be sitting stiffly in the engineer’s seat with your eyes intently watching the track for the next signal. Your hand would be on the brake lever, ready hit the brakes in a split second. The very instance that you saw the that a switch was wrong you would hit brakes. I see several things wrong with your theory. I don’t think anyone could sit for that long with a laser-like focus out the windshield You’d have 1000 distractions, anywhere from your conductor asking you a question to scratching an itch. All those normal distractions would break your concentration. I don’t think anyone could react in only one second. Even if you were at an arcade playing Whack-A-Mole and expecting something to pop up, your mind would take more than one second to process what’s going on and to react. I don’t know if they’d pass you in engineer school if you were forsaking everything else in the cab in order to focus on the switch down the track. I doubt anyone would want to work with you if that was your habit. If you could, through super-human ability react in one second, you’d still be only two seconds away from impact. How much braking would the train do in the two seconds left? In conclusion, I’d say you’re living in a dream world if you think you could have done any better than the engineer did. To suggest otherwise is kind of an insult to professional railroaders. Oh no need to pretend not to be sarcastic. Let’s start from the end and go back to the beginning of your report. 1) I never said I could have done better than the engineer did. I never suggested it. All I said is what I would have done. And no professional railroaders would be insulted by what I said. These ideas are all in your head and you always project them onto everything I say here. It goes back to the time when you accused me of driving off all of the professional railroaders. 2) How do you come up with two seconds for braking? One second would be to react and make the application, and there would be about ten seconds left. 3) There is no need to maintain laser-like focus on the track in order to spot any switches that show up. Engineers are supposed to know where they are at all times. Certainly they are expected to know where all mainline switches are. So when you know one is coming up, you watch for it. 4) Why do you think it not possible to make an emergency application in one second? A lot can happen in one second. How long would it take you to make an emergency application? 5) If you have 1000 distractions going on, you are doing something wrong.
Randy StahlDoesn't matter , the whole point of the post was to see how many people had me on ignore.
I don't.
zugmann Randy Stahl Doesn't matter , the whole point of the post was to see how many people had me on ignore. I don't.
Randy Stahl Doesn't matter , the whole point of the post was to see how many people had me on ignore.
I don't even have Euclid on ignore!
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
BaltACD zugmann Randy Stahl Doesn't matter , the whole point of the post was to see how many people had me on ignore. I don't. I don't even have Euclid on ignore!
There's an ignore option!?
Never mind, wouldn't want to use it anyway. Why miss out on all this fun reading.
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
Murphy SidingOK. I'll try to pretend this is sincere and not be (too) sarcastic. So, you would be sitting stiffly in the engineer’s seat with your eyes intently watching the track for the next signal. Your hand would be on the brake lever, ready hit the brakes in a split second. The very instance that you saw the that a switch was wrong you would hit brakes. I see several things wrong with your theory. I don’t think anyone could sit for that long with a laser-like focus out the windshield You’d have 1000 distractions, anywhere from your conductor asking you a question to scratching an itch. All those normal distractions would break your concentration. I don’t think anyone could react in only one second. Even if you were at an arcade playing Whack-A-Mole and expecting something to pop up, your mind would take more than one second to process what’s going on and to react. I don’t know if they’d pass you in engineer school if you were forsaking everything else in the cab in order to focus on the switch down the track. I doubt anyone would want to work with you if that was your habit. If you could, through super-human ability react in one second, you’d still be only two seconds away from impact. How much braking would the train do in the two seconds left? In conclusion, I’d say you’re living in a dream world if you think you could have done any better than the engineer did. To suggest otherwise is kind of an insult to professional railroaders.
We had one GP38 and three ex-CONRAIL heavyweight passenger cars with 110 lbs. of BP pressure. We were running on a clear signal down a 1.2% grade at 40 mph. The next signal should have been no less than an "Approach" indication. When we came in sight of the signal around a right hand curve, we were about 1,100 ft. from the signal and it was a "STOP" signal!The following is everything that went through my mind at 40 mph and at 1,100 feet;I could make a normal stop, which would have put us past the red board. This would mean that the dispatching center would have to run a signal log to show that the signal had dropped after I had past the "Clear" signal and this would take forever to complete.or,I could put the train in emergency and try to stop as soon as we could, possibly without passing the red board and having to put up with all of the crap associated with that as stated above.Remember we are now at 40 mph & and a wee bit less than 1,100 feet.I put the train in emergency.Where did I stop? Amazingly, short of the red board and far enough back that we didn't have to look straight up to see the signal, which by the way a bolt of lightning had made it drop it in my face!
It truly is amazing what your brain can process in a split second!
.
BigJim Murphy Siding OK. I'll try to pretend this is sincere and not be (too) sarcastic. So, you would be sitting stiffly in the engineer’s seat with your eyes intently watching the track for the next signal. Your hand would be on the brake lever, ready hit the brakes in a split second. The very instance that you saw the that a switch was wrong you would hit brakes. I see several things wrong with your theory. I don’t think anyone could sit for that long with a laser-like focus out the windshield You’d have 1000 distractions, anywhere from your conductor asking you a question to scratching an itch. All those normal distractions would break your concentration. I don’t think anyone could react in only one second. Even if you were at an arcade playing Whack-A-Mole and expecting something to pop up, your mind would take more than one second to process what’s going on and to react. I don’t know if they’d pass you in engineer school if you were forsaking everything else in the cab in order to focus on the switch down the track. I doubt anyone would want to work with you if that was your habit. If you could, through super-human ability react in one second, you’d still be only two seconds away from impact. How much braking would the train do in the two seconds left? In conclusion, I’d say you’re living in a dream world if you think you could have done any better than the engineer did. To suggest otherwise is kind of an insult to professional railroaders. Let me give you the short story of something that happened to me. We had one GP38 and three ex-CONRAIL heavyweight passenger cars with 110 lbs. of BP pressure. We were running on a clear signal down a 1.2% grade at 40 mph. The next signal should have been no less than an "Approach" indication. When we came in sight of the signal around a right hand curve, we were about 1,100 ft. from the signal and it was a "STOP" signal!The following is everything that went through my mind at 40 mph and at 1,100 feet;I could make a normal stop, which would have put us past the red board. This would mean that the dispatching center would have to run a signal log to show that the signal had dropped after I had past the "Clear" signal and this would take forever to complete.or,I could put the train in emergency and try to stop as soon as we could, possibly without passing the red board and having to put up with all of the crap associated with that as stated above.Remember we are now at 40 mph & and a wee bit less than 1,100 feet.I put the train in emergency.Where did I stop? Amazingly, short of the red board and far enough back that we didn't have to look straight up to see the signal, which by the way a bolt of lightning had made it drop it in my face! It truly is amazing what your brain can process in a split second!
Murphy Siding OK. I'll try to pretend this is sincere and not be (too) sarcastic. So, you would be sitting stiffly in the engineer’s seat with your eyes intently watching the track for the next signal. Your hand would be on the brake lever, ready hit the brakes in a split second. The very instance that you saw the that a switch was wrong you would hit brakes. I see several things wrong with your theory. I don’t think anyone could sit for that long with a laser-like focus out the windshield You’d have 1000 distractions, anywhere from your conductor asking you a question to scratching an itch. All those normal distractions would break your concentration. I don’t think anyone could react in only one second. Even if you were at an arcade playing Whack-A-Mole and expecting something to pop up, your mind would take more than one second to process what’s going on and to react. I don’t know if they’d pass you in engineer school if you were forsaking everything else in the cab in order to focus on the switch down the track. I doubt anyone would want to work with you if that was your habit. If you could, through super-human ability react in one second, you’d still be only two seconds away from impact. How much braking would the train do in the two seconds left? In conclusion, I’d say you’re living in a dream world if you think you could have done any better than the engineer did. To suggest otherwise is kind of an insult to professional railroaders.
Let me give you the short story of something that happened to me.
Instructions in effect on the Baltimore Division when such a situation presents itself was to make a Maximum Service Brake Application - especially with freight trains for which a Emergency Brake application will create the need for a walking inspection to insure ALL Hazmat are on the rail. (most all Merchandise trains containe HAZMAT).
It is also amazing the braking power that a GP38 and 24 passenger car axles can provide.
VOLKER LANDWEHR RDG467 The Budd cars (ex-SEPTA, nee PRR 244 & 248) were modified with crash energy management "systems", which appear consist mostly of plating over the end door openings to make the carbody more uniform. The Figure 1 shows the CEM frame at the left end. The type of CEM construction is better visible in Figure 3 on page 2 of the following link: https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/9504/dot_9504_DS1.pdf? RDG467 Conclusion was that the FEA model was very reliable in predicting the behaviour of the carbodies, although not 100% accurate in predicting where buckling would occur. FEA models can only be accurate if you insert all the material weaknesses at the right location. That is almost impossible. Perhaps i don't understand you correctly but you can't compare the tests with accident cars. In the tests the load was applied at 4 point, 2 near the roof and 2 on the frame where the CEM frame was applied.Regards, Volker
RDG467 The Budd cars (ex-SEPTA, nee PRR 244 & 248) were modified with crash energy management "systems", which appear consist mostly of plating over the end door openings to make the carbody more uniform.
The Figure 1 shows the CEM frame at the left end. The type of CEM construction is better visible in Figure 3 on page 2 of the following link: https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/9504/dot_9504_DS1.pdf?
RDG467 Conclusion was that the FEA model was very reliable in predicting the behaviour of the carbodies, although not 100% accurate in predicting where buckling would occur.
FEA models can only be accurate if you insert all the material weaknesses at the right location. That is almost impossible.
Perhaps i don't understand you correctly but you can't compare the tests with accident cars. In the tests the load was applied at 4 point, 2 near the roof and 2 on the frame where the CEM frame was applied.Regards, Volker
Volker, you are correct that there is no *direct* correlation between the static tests on the Pioneer III cars and the accident involving Amtk #91 and the Metroliner-based "Heritage" cars.
Just wanted to make note of the design standards for passenger cars and the tremendous forces involved in this tragic collision. I can't recall a collision where one passenger car buckled and a second split in half without hitting a lineside structure. The destroyed cars in the Frankford Junction derailment hit the catenary poles at 90+ mph, which essentially made confetti of the stainless steel shells.
You can see the after-effects of the energy absorbed by both the Amtrak unit and the lead CSX unit, but the 15 foot displacement of the CSX locos isn't visible in the pix. I'm guessing that compressing the slack (buffing) accounted for that, and then when the slack stopped 'running in', and the nose of the P32 was massively deformed, it started climbing over the front of the CSX GE and rolling to the conductor's side on which it landed.
I haven't estimated how much kinetic energy was absorbed in the initial loco to loco collision, but there appears to be enough "left over" to buckle one car (1.15 M+ pounds of force) and virtually split a second car in half. I wonder if the NTSB will be able to model the energy dissipation scenario involved here.
EuclidWhat is your estimate for the stopping distance for #91 with an emergency application, at the location of the collision, assuming it was an engine and eight cars, and traveling at 56 mph?
BigJim Euclid What is your estimate for the stopping distance for #91 with an emergency application, at the location of the collision, assuming it was an engine and eight cars, and traveling at 56 mph? I did not have enough time running AMTRAK equipment to even venture a guess.
Euclid What is your estimate for the stopping distance for #91 with an emergency application, at the location of the collision, assuming it was an engine and eight cars, and traveling at 56 mph?
I did not have enough time running AMTRAK equipment to even venture a guess.
A whole lot more than the estimated 250 foot sight line, in any event.
BaltACDA whole lot more than the estimated 250 foot sight line, in any event.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.