PTC did not cause this wreck.
There will be times when railroads have to take signals out of service for some reason. Procedures exist to deal with dark territory.
Someone, or someones, did not follow procedure. They may have meant to, they may have thought they did . . . but somehow, the proper actions mandated by the policy were not carried out. Unless vandalism was involved (very unlikely), this accident was a result of someone not doing their job properly.
It's a huge tragedy, but it has nothing to do with PTC.
Blaming it on PTC is like blaming it on America's nuclear deterrance. The US was not under attack; so, since it was a normal day, Amtrak and CSX ran trains as usual. If they had not run trains, the accident would not have occurred.
Still in training.
Euclid like falling from the trapeze on the day you decide to work without a net.
Actually, we have two types of trapeze artists. One type works without a net every day and remembers to clip their safety harness to the trapeze every time. The other type works with a net, so doesn't need or ever bother with a saftey harness.
One day, a net guy works without a net and doesn't remember to use a harness and clip in. ...and falls.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
Ok, I am not going to get into a p!$$ing match over words as had occured on this and other threads. I did not blame PTC for the deaths, but indicated that the installation "led" to the incident. If my words were misunderstood, then allow this to be a clarification.
I have never experienced an industrial accident such as this and hopefully never will. I have had a number of "incidents" in which mistakes were made which kept cascading into nearly complete failure of that aspect of a project. No lives were involved, just company integrity and $$$. What I have seen that the layering of mistakes or omissions, when compounded simply become out of control if not checked. There was a movie nearly 20 years ago which was entitled "The Perfect Storm" in which natural events and human error led to disaster. I have always remembered that (another similar theme with better ending was "Apollo 13").
Make this understood...I am in no way minimizing the deaths and injuries of those affected, but there are times when events occur, if not under complete control and understanding can completely fall out of control.
My thoughts are with those affected, including the crew members, dispatchers and other involved.
Ed
oltmannd Euclid like falling from the trapeze on the day you decide to work without a net. Actually, we have two types of trapeze artists. One type works without a net every day and remembers to clip their safety harness to the trapeze every time. The other type works with a net, so doesn't need or ever bother with a saftey harness. One day, a net guy works without a net and doesn't remember to use a harness and clip in. ...and falls.
Yes. I see what you mean. I had overlooked the fact that the switch position awareness process is not used when the signals are not suspened.
MP173 Ok, I am not going to get into a p!$$ing match over words as had occured on this and other threads. I did not blame PTC for the deaths, but indicated that the installation "led" to the incident. If my words were misunderstood, then allow this to be a clarification.
I personally was not referring to any post by you. I had merely remembered that elsewhere in the forum there was a post by someone else, of which part was this sentence: "So, if signal suspension to install PTC... this could be a PTC caused collision?"
I have no desire or intention of engaging in one-on-ones with anyone here, ever. I was just stating (in so many words) that in the realm of logic and causality, one cannot fairly state that the wreck was caused by PTC. In my opinion.
Thanks for clarifying...this event was a tragedy and I really do not want to go down the path of minimizing the losses over words.
LithoniaOperator "So, if signal suspension to install PTC... this could be a PTC caused collision?"
...was me. The point of it was the irony (?) of the circumstances needed to install PTC equipment created the circumstances that helped cause the wreck. Clearly there is a lot more than that going on...
I think I remember reading some years ago that when one railroad has trackage rights on another's tracks, the guest road always pays regardless of which road is at fault. I guess you could look at Amtrak as the guest in a trackage rights situation.
_____________
"A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner
Paul, you have reminded me that I also read that more years ago than I can remember. However, it certainly seems unjust if the guest road is following instructions given by the owning road.
Johnny
Don't know what Amtrak's agreement says, but the standard AAR detour agreement puts all liability - regardless of fault - on the detouring railroad.
The 'poster child' for that is back in the 1960's when a detouring Rock Island passenger train collided with a standing CB&Q passenger (?) train in an interlocking (at Streator, Illinois?), killing the RI crew. The cause was later found to be a botched signal upgrade by the CB&Q (sound familiar), giving the RI train a 'false clear'. RI sued the CB&Q, but the federal judge upheld the AAR indemnity clause. This was referenced in an article Michael W. Blascak (a Chicago attorney) wrote for Trains about trackage rights and detour agreements.
We may feel its unfair, but "a contract is a contract" is the position the railroad takes - kind of an 'all-fault' clause, to coin a phrase. Also, the kind of incident is anticipated by the contract - it's not like something bizarre beyond the contemplation of the parties has happened (like a volcano blowing up).
- PDN.
EuclidI thought this was interesting. Amtrak pays all damages even of the accident is caused by the host railroad. That doesn’t seem right.
It was part of the deal Amtrak and the host roads reached years ago after the original deal from 1971 expired. Both sides were happy with it. The flip side is if Amtrak were to cause a wreck with a massively bad result, say a chlorine car breach in a city, Amtrak would not have to pay.
The article also refers to a kind of intimidation of Amtrak by the host railroad to accept the extra liability burden in exchange for fair treatment in handling Amtrak traffic. That is a little hard to believe possible considering that accepting Amtrak trains by the host railroad is presumably mandated by the government. Why shouldn’t the mandate include fair treatment of Amtrak in traffic handling?
oltmannd The flip side is if Amtrak were to cause a wreck with a massively bad result, say a chlorine car breach in a city, Amtrak would not have to pay.
The flip side is if Amtrak were to cause a wreck with a massively bad result, say a chlorine car breach in a city, Amtrak would not have to pay.
oltmannd, why is that? I am confused.
In this case, how far does Amtrak's liability go? Does it have to pay to repair or replace CSX's locomotives? Repair to track and related structures? What about CSX's costs related to delays and detours due to the main being tied up?
LithoniaOperatoroltmannd, why is that? I am confused.
As I understand it -- Amtrak would have to pay ... for any gassing or death to its passengers, or damage to its own equipment. Anything else caused by the breach, potentially involving the kind of damage a Graniteville event would cause in a heavily-populated area, would be the responsibility of the 'owning' railroad.
In fact, if I understand the situation correctly, even if Amtrak were to cause the problem with a 'one-train' event, like a 188-like overspeed accident that the 'host' railroad did nothing to cause, they would only be liable for their own damages.
And Amtrak's overall liability in any case is 'capped' by the same amount per incident that was mentioned in the 188 overspeed wreck.
Paul_D_North_Jr Don't know what Amtrak's agreement says, but the standard AAR detour agreement puts all liability - regardless of fault - on the detouring railroad. The 'poster child' for that is back in the 1960's when a detouring Rock Island passenger train collided with a standing CB&Q passenger (?) train in an interlocking (at Streator, Illinois?), killing the RI crew. The cause was later found to be a botched signal upgrade by the CB&Q (sound familiar), giving the RI train a 'false clear'. RI sued the CB&Q, but the federal judge upheld the AAR indemnity clause. This was referenced in an article Michael W. Blascak (a Chicago attorney) wrote for Trains about trackage rights and detour agreements. We may feel its unfair, but "a contract is a contract" is the position the railroad takes - kind of an 'all-fault' clause, to coin a phrase. Also, the kind of incident is anticipated by the contract - it's not like something bizarre beyond the contemplation of the parties has happened (like a volcano blowing up). - PDN.
Montgomery, IL 1964. Combined Rocky Mountain Rocket and Golden State detouring over the CB&Q.
http://railfan44.blogspot.com/2014/01/major-passenger-train-wreck-montgomery.html
Jeff
I think the point is that Amtrak pays for their own liability if they cause a wreck, and they also pay for the host railroad's liability if the host railroad causes a wreck. The point of the article flows from this Amtrak collision in South Carolina. The point made is that even if CSX caused the collision by their own negligence, Amtrak still pays for the damages to Amtrak such as loss of equipment and the death and injury to the passengers and crew.
LithoniaOperator oltmannd The flip side is if Amtrak were to cause a wreck with a massively bad result, say a chlorine car breach in a city, Amtrak would not have to pay. oltmannd, why is that? I am confused.
That's the deal they have. Each road pays for it's own regardless of fault. Sort of like "no-fault" auto insurance.
oltmannd LithoniaOperator oltmannd The flip side is if Amtrak were to cause a wreck with a massively bad result, say a chlorine car breach in a city, Amtrak would not have to pay. oltmannd, why is that? I am confused. That's the deal they have. Each road pays for it's own regardless of fault. Sort of like "no-fault" auto insurance.
But if Amtrak caused it, wouldn't any harm to the general public be Amtrak's responsibility. I think you are saying that the host railroad would have to pay for damage to its own equipment, physical plant, and foreign-road freight cars and cargo in its care at the time.
But if trackside non-railroad property and non-railroad individuals were harmed, wouldn't that be Amtrak's problem?
Not challenging you. I am just clueless about this subject.
LithoniaOperator oltmannd LithoniaOperator oltmannd The flip side is if Amtrak were to cause a wreck with a massively bad result, say a chlorine car breach in a city, Amtrak would not have to pay. oltmannd, why is that? I am confused. That's the deal they have. Each road pays for it's own regardless of fault. Sort of like "no-fault" auto insurance. But if Amtrak caused it, wouldn't any harm to the general public be Amtrak's responsibility. I think you are saying that the host railroad would have to pay for damage to its own equipment, physical plant, and foreign-road freight cars and cargo in its care at the time. But if trackside non-railroad property and non-railroad individuals were harmed, wouldn't that be Amtrak's problem? Not challenging you. I am just clueless about this subject.
Good questions. I don't really know. I imagine if the damage was from the host road's equipment, the host road would be on the hook. If they are the one hauling the chlorine car, then it's on them.
I do wonder how all this would hold up in a civil suit, though. Would the "no fault" deal hold up?
oltmanndThat's the deal they have. Each road pays for it's own regardless of fault. Sort of like "no-fault" auto insurance.
Now I'm confused. I thought we had established that the "guest" road always paid.
Paul of Covington oltmannd That's the deal they have. Each road pays for it's own regardless of fault. Sort of like "no-fault" auto insurance. Now I'm confused. I thought we had established that the "guest" road always paid.
oltmannd That's the deal they have. Each road pays for it's own regardless of fault. Sort of like "no-fault" auto insurance.
Railroad liability and indemnity clauses have kept generations of lawyers fully employed - a internet forum will not bring clarity.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Lawyers will argue that if CSX knew that they had to pay for damages in an Amtrak wreck that CSX caused, they would be more careful in the operations surrounding and governing the Amtrak train. In the case of No. 91, maybe CSX would have spiked the switches or imposed restricted speed if they thought that was cheaper than taking the financial risk for damages if the train were wrecked because of a CSX mistake.
The Cayce wreck was cause by two CSX employees.
Everyone takes care of their own. An Amtrak train hits a CSX train on CSX territiory and Amtrak pays for the their people and equipment. CSX pays for their people, equipment and plant.
NS derails on the corridor and an Amtrak train hit it, NS pays for their people and equipment, Amtrak pays for their people equipment and plant.
That's my understanding, anyway.
It's also why most mainline steam excursions operate as Amtrak specials on the host road.
Thanks, Jeff - all sounds correct (it came back to me that the CB&Q train was the Ak-Sar-Ben). There was also an article in Trains shortly afterward in the mid-1960's titled "The Accident that Couldn't Happen" by Robert B. Shaw, as I recall.
Randy Stahl The Cayce wreck was cause by two CSX employees.
What roles did they play?
EuclidWhat roles did they play?
I think that's been pretty well established.
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...
tree68 I think that's been pretty well established.
This is starting to feel like Firehouse eh, Tree?
This space reserved for SpaceMouse's future presidential candidacy advertisements
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.