https://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-safe-are-americas-railroads-60-minutes/
As of today only 10 percent of the mandated railroads have fully implemented PTC.
Lesley Stahl: It seems so obvious. It just seems so urgent that it's almost unfathomable that it doesn't get done.
Robert Sumwalt: That's why the NTSB is just flabbergasted that we still don't have it more than 10 years after Congress mandated Positive Train Control.
One issue has been the Federal Railroad Administration, FRA, the railroad's regulatory agency, criticized in government reports for not vigorously enforcing the PTC mandate. We tried to talk to the agency but they declined our interview request.
Its handling of PTC has been a source of frustration for Robert Sumwalt of the NTSB.
Lesley Stahl: The regulatory agency, The Federal Railroad Administration, are they just not doing their job?
Robert Sumwalt: Well, we have issued recommendations to the FRA and they've not acted upon those.
Lesley Stahl: Why are they so lenient with the railroads? Somebody told us that in his opinion they're captive to the railroad system, to the industry.
Robert Sumwalt: The regulator needs to step up to the plate and do their job and regulate.
Lesley Stahl: Who's responsible?
Robert Sumwalt: Well, ultimately, it's up to the railroads to put this system in place. It's a steep climb for them. It's going to cost, depending on who you talk to, anywhere between $10 and $14 billion for the system to be implemented.
And after the first major accident in PTC territory (OK, the second since Amtrak had one some years ago in Michigan where their version of PTC was in effect.) they will wonder how they can still happen.
Jeff
Whether or not members think the piece is fair, it is a powerful indictment. And it is still a popular program.
"We have learned that Amtrak agreed decades ago, in secret indemnity contracts, to be responsible for damages even if the freight company is at fault and the accident occurs on the freight company's tracks. "--quoting Mark James
I had long understood that the standard procedure in establishing trackage rights was to hold the road with rights responsible for all damages even when the owning road's employees were at fault.
Johnny
A slanted, half truthed hatchet job. Lost a lot of respect for both Leslie Stahl and Zumwalt.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
BaltACD A slanted, half truthed hatchet job. Lost a lot of respect for both Leslie Stahl and Zumwalt.
The 10% comment was just a little sloppy. Nothing said on the commuter lines failure to adopt or get started .....
...and the 7-8 major derailments on a passenger MT in one given area?
If it bleeds, it leads.
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...
Agree with BaltADC
It is interesting to learn how this story is developing as we wait for a report that will one day tell us what went wrong that night.
The engineer says there was nothing he could have done to prevent the wreck and he had to trust his conductor. Yet, as I recall, he did not exactly trust his conductor. He said he asked the conductor earlier if he was sure he got that switch because he did not see the conductor line it back for the mainline. And he said he thought he would have seen it if it happened. He said he knew where the conductor was during that time when the switch would have been relined, and he (the engineer) said did not believe the conductor was ever in the proximity necessary to get that switch.
Then just before the wreck, he asked the conductor again and, despite being reassured again by the conductor, the engineer decided to walk down to the switch and check for himself. But he ran out of time and the Amtrak showed up at the misaligned switch. What do you do when the official process says you are supposed to trust the conductor, but you don’t trust the conductor?
CSX disabled signal system for PTC work.
Amtrak train crashes into CSX train due to human error.
60 Minutes bashes CSX for not installing PTC...?
NorthWest60 Minutes bashes CSX for not installing PTC...?
Rather sounds like they were bashing all railroads, and the FRA, for not having PTC up and running.
Nobody mentioned that the technology and equipment that was needed to make it work essentially had to be invented, radio spectrum had to be obtained, equpment had to be installed - likely after the manufacturers busted their butts trying to get it out the door.
Just blame those bad, old railroads. All they ever do is block crossings when you're in a hurry, after all... And have massive wrecks all the time that - well, you get my drift.
Don't forget-- we also have an expert's opinion that "the tracks are in horrible shape." This was from a neighborhood electical contractor.
Sensationalism sells.
_____________
"A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner
Why do people so readily attach credibility to tv productions and reporting?
Thank goodness I missed out on this. Mrs. watched it, gave me a review. Listening to bluegrass cd's down in basement cave was wisely worth more of my time
Don't worry. Now we have PSR.
yeah, um... yeah.
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
One important fact was glossed over in the 60 Minutes report. There was an excelent safety system that had done a good job for preventing accidents for years. It was disabled to make PTC easier to install. it should have been left in place and some means found to install PTC without dissabling it until PTC was operational. It isn't rocket science.
charlie hebdo And it is still a popular program.
And it is still a popular program.
So is TMZ.
An "expensive model collector"
Deggesty"We have learned that Amtrak agreed decades ago, in secret indemnity contracts, to be responsible for damages even if the freight company is at fault and the accident occurs on the freight company's tracks. "--quoting Mark James I had long understood that the standard procedure in establishing trackage rights was to hold the road with rights responsible for all damages even when the owning road's employees were at fault.
Haven't we been all over this, in the Amtrak 188 threads?
No smoking gun, though -- that is, if "Stahl et al." actually remembered their coverage of some of the post-accident shenanigans, or had done their due diligence. Someone like Mike should check to see exactly what the network's coverage contained. And prepare to 'out' them if this new claim turns out (as I strongly suspect it will) to be expedience.
NorthWest CSX disabled signal system for PTC work. Amtrak train crashes into CSX train due to human error. 60 Minutes bashes CSX for not installing PTC...?
.
BigJimI have to wonder, if the signals were out, why was the Amtrak train travelling more than "Restricted speed"?
My take - It had become dark territory, at least for the moment. Amtrak was likely issued an EC-1 (track warrant). Not likely they would have been allowed 79 MPH, but normal freight speed wouldn't be out of the question.
Dark territory relies on everyone doing their job - restoring switches, reporting correctly, etc. Apparently, that didn't happen.
BigJim NorthWest CSX disabled signal system for PTC work. Amtrak train crashes into CSX train due to human error. 60 Minutes bashes CSX for not installing PTC...? I have to wonder, if the signals were out, why was the Amtrak train travelling more than "Restricted speed"?
I have to wonder, if the signals were out, why was the Amtrak train travelling more than "Restricted speed"?
We had discussed that point in great detail right after the wreck, and the predominent consensus here was that you could not run the railroad effectively with that much speed restriction. I have no idea what speed was actually authorized, nor what the normal track speed was through that area.
Running dark may be technically legal, but it strikes me as asking for trouble to switch over to running dark in an area accustomed to relying on signals. As I recall, the NTSB responded to there being a need for restricted speed in this incident.
daveklepperOne important fact was glossed over in the 60 Minutes report. There was an excelent safety system that had done a good job for preventing accidents for years. It was disabled to make PTC easier to install. it should have been left in place and some means found to install PTC without dissabling it until PTC was operational. It isn't rocket science.
Dave - when it comes to signalling - you cannot leave one system working while you are 'actively' cutting over to a new system. The process is analogus to changing saw blades on your circular saw while the blade is in operation. The blade must be stopped to allow it to be changed.
A signal suspensions covers the period of time when the 'new' PTC signals and equipment that have already been installed on the ground at the appropriate locations.
Control Point signalling is connected to the track circuits and Control Points that are on either side of the control point being upgraded. The new signal equipment has to be connected to the appropriate circuitry of currently operating system and still exiting things while at the same time the Old Signals and circuitry are being inactivated and removed. Once the new circuitry has been connected and the old circuitry has been removed - then the hard part begins - TESTING - insuring that the new system actually performs as it is supposed to - in all the operating conditions that the new equipment has been installed to protect.
I have not worked in the Signal Dept, so I don't know the specifc checks and balances that apply to them in the field during signal suspension cut overs. I have worked with numerous Signal Suspensions, at least as CSX was doing them BEFORE PSR came down the pike. The normal routine - in the week preceeding a Signal Suspension - a Superintendent's Bulletin would be published indicating the SPECIFIC locations where the signals would be taken Out of Service, the starting time and the specific means of operation that would be implemented during the period that signals would be Out of Service. On my division, a contact telephone 'officer' would be established and EVERY CREW going on duty that would be operating IN or THROUGH the area of the Signal Suspension was REQUIRED to contact this 'officer' to one on one review what the requirements for their job would be in operating In or THROUGH the area of suspended signals. (in the Cayce incident, both the Amtrak crew and the CSX crew would have contacted this 'officer' when going on duty - if the incident had occured on my division in pre PSR days).
The Signal Suspension Bulletin will also specify what working signals 'outside' the suspended area will mean - ie. at a Control Point the controls entry into the suspended area (Signals Suspended at B & C - Signals at A & D still function). Suspended area will be from departure of A to arrival at D. Access to the area of suspension is conveyed by a Track Warrant issued by the Train Dispatcher under the rules that apply to TWC territory. The Bulletin will specify that the signals A and D do not convey movement authority into the territory within the suspension area UNLESS the crew also holds the corresponding TWC authority - those signals DO NOT convey block condition authority - only the TWC authority does.
The CSX crew in the incident HELD TWC authority within the Signal Suspension area to perform the duties that their job function required. When the CSX crew completed their job function they released the TWC authority they held - a REQUIREMENT before releasing the authority is to have the Main Track switches within the Signal Suspension area that they have handled HAVE BEEN LINED FOR MAIN TRACK MOVEMENT. It is ONLY AFTER the CSX crew releases their TWC authority for the area that the Train Dispatcher will issue the authority to the Amtrak crew to operate through that area.
Additional note - by CSX Rules - person at the operating controls of a locomotive CANNOT copy 'written' authorities while the train is moving. If the engineer is alone in the cab, the train must be stopped for him to copy and repeat the authority. Compliance with this rule is why the Conductor was on the locomotive at the time of the collision.
Signal Suspensions are (or were) not something that was taken lightly in the enviornment that I worked under.
tree68 BigJim I have to wonder, if the signals were out, why was the Amtrak train travelling more than "Restricted speed"? My take - It had become dark territory, at least for the moment. Amtrak was likely issued an EC-1 (track warrant). Not likely they would have been allowed 79 MPH, but normal freight speed wouldn't be out of the question. Dark territory relies on everyone doing their job - restoring switches, reporting correctly, etc. Apparently, that didn't happen.
BigJim I have to wonder, if the signals were out, why was the Amtrak train travelling more than "Restricted speed"?
Maximum speeds allowed on unsignaled track is 59 mph for passenger, 49 mph for freight trains. Includes when signals are taken out of service or running against the current of traffic when a track isn't signaled for both directions.
Paul of Covington Don't forget-- we also have an expert's opinion that "the tracks are in horrible shape." This was from a neighborhood electical contractor. Sensationalism sells.
It sure does. I remember 60 Minutes' report on the state of rail safety some 45 years ago. I think it was Morley Safer who did that piece.. As I recall he was standing alongside a track, and after a train had passed (lead by what looked like a Wabash FA unit) he pulled a spike out of the track and held it up to the camera..sensationalism indeed (and technically vandalism too)..
You are all missing the big picture. Most people watching this will conclude:
1. Bad and apparently avoidable accidents with Amtrak (sometimes involving the freight rails) do happen. [True]
2. The fired engineer on the CSX train said he wouldn't ride Amtrak. [True]
3. Amtrak is not safe. [An opinion shared by a former Amtrak engineer many times on here]
4. The FRA is just an extension of the AAR. [Conjecture, but Zumwalt's statement was damaging.]
5. The railroads have been very slow to adopt PTC. [The excuses may or may not be valid. But Zumwalt's comment was very suggestive.]
A lot more people watch 60 Minutes than read this forum or work for the rails. If you think this is good PR, you are in denial. If the piece is deliberately in error, perhaps the AAR should demand a correction or sue. But that will never happen.
charlie hebdo You are all missing the big picture. Most people watching this will conclude: 1. Bad and apparently avoidable accidents with Amtrak (sometimes involving the freight rails) do happen. [True] 2. The fired engineer on the CSX train said he wouldn't ride Amtrak. [True] 3. Amtrak is not safe. [An opinion shared by a former Amtrak engineer many times on here] 4. The FRA is just an extension of the AAR. [Conjecture, but Zumwalt's statement was damaging.] 5. The railroads have been very slow to adopt PTC. [The excuses may or may not be valid. But Zumwalt's comment was very suggestive.] A lot more people watch 60 Minutes than read this forum or work for the rails. If you think this is good PR, you are in denial. If the piece is deliberately in error, perhaps the AAR should demand a correction or sue. But that will never happen.
I am not missing the big picture. This is certainly bad PR, and the 60-Minutes piece has not misrepresented anything. In my opinion, the only thing misrepresenting something was the engineer’s statement of his thoughts about the need to confirm the switch position. In my opinion, his 60-Minutes statement conflicts with his interview published shortly after the crash.
The fact that PTC would have prevented this crash does not mean that CSX is to blame for the crash. It seems to me that the fault lies mutually between the engineer and conductor since the paperwork seemingly required them to both certify that the switch was properly lined.
tree68 BigJim I have to wonder, if the signals were out, why was the Amtrak train travelling more than "Restricted speed"? My take - It had become dark territory, at least for the moment.
BigJim
My take - It had become dark territory, at least for the moment.
Ulrich Paul of Covington Don't forget-- we also have an expert's opinion that "the tracks are in horrible shape." This was from a neighborhood electical contractor. Sensationalism sells. It sure does. I remember 60 Minutes' report on the state of rail safety some 45 years ago. I think it was Morley Safer who did that piece.. As I recall he was standing alongside a track, and after a train had passed (lead by what looked like a Wabash FA unit) he pulled a spike out of the track and held it up to the camera..sensationalism indeed (and technically vandalism too)..
60 Mins was once, a well-watched program...
These days,maybe, not so much.
These days and times, the "Media" has been spending any credibility, that it once had; throwing it into the furnace of politics. Any news other than that centering around the political landscape, seems to escape any reportage..."Last night's Alabama tornado, and its 23(+?) death toll is getting, what seems to be, 'honorable mention' reporting(?)"
Paul of Covington's remark about "sensationalism sells" is the stock, and trade of the current media business.
I think that tree68 [Larry] mentioned, as well,[paraphrased] " That it seems that 'Blood' sells in the news business." Just mark me down, as maybe, overly cynical! I'll leave it to our professionals, who 'practiced' the business of railroading to sort out the details. BaltACD's analysis seems to also be spot-on where the AMTRAK,CSX , SC, incident was concerned.
The 'media' seems to slant the news, according to their own particular sets of biases and agendas.
Rant Off !
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.