BaltACD 243129 VOLKER LANDWEHR 243129 My agenda as you call it is Amtrak hiring and training procedures that can also apply to all crafts. The above-listed incidents were the result of human error which was the result of poor training which is not unique to Amtrak. You should limit the accidents you name to those where you can judge the training procedures. That are accidents caused by human error of Amtrak engineers. I doubt that you can judge CSX's procedures or Amtrak MofW procedures.Regards, Volker I am not judging their training procedures it's obvious that poor training and supervision is in part responsible for leaving that switch open. When we used to run under manual block system rules we had to approach all facing point switches prepared stop. I'm not sure if CSX rules call for that or not. There are no rules about approacing facing point switches prepared to stop - when a train has proper block authority for the territory on CSX. If there were there would be little need of traffic control systems for dark territory. A significant amount of CSX territory as well as the territory of other Class 1 carriers is Dark, non-signaled territory and operated with some form dark traffic control - eithere DTC (Direct Traffic Control) with specifically defined block limits, or TWC (Track Warrant Control) where the authorized limits can be specified by Mile Post or Control Point references.
243129 VOLKER LANDWEHR 243129 My agenda as you call it is Amtrak hiring and training procedures that can also apply to all crafts. The above-listed incidents were the result of human error which was the result of poor training which is not unique to Amtrak. You should limit the accidents you name to those where you can judge the training procedures. That are accidents caused by human error of Amtrak engineers. I doubt that you can judge CSX's procedures or Amtrak MofW procedures.Regards, Volker I am not judging their training procedures it's obvious that poor training and supervision is in part responsible for leaving that switch open. When we used to run under manual block system rules we had to approach all facing point switches prepared stop. I'm not sure if CSX rules call for that or not.
VOLKER LANDWEHR 243129 My agenda as you call it is Amtrak hiring and training procedures that can also apply to all crafts. The above-listed incidents were the result of human error which was the result of poor training which is not unique to Amtrak. You should limit the accidents you name to those where you can judge the training procedures. That are accidents caused by human error of Amtrak engineers. I doubt that you can judge CSX's procedures or Amtrak MofW procedures.Regards, Volker
243129 My agenda as you call it is Amtrak hiring and training procedures that can also apply to all crafts. The above-listed incidents were the result of human error which was the result of poor training which is not unique to Amtrak.
You should limit the accidents you name to those where you can judge the training procedures. That are accidents caused by human error of Amtrak engineers. I doubt that you can judge CSX's procedures or Amtrak MofW procedures.Regards, Volker
I am not judging their training procedures it's obvious that poor training and supervision is in part responsible for leaving that switch open. When we used to run under manual block system rules we had to approach all facing point switches prepared stop. I'm not sure if CSX rules call for that or not.
There are no rules about approacing facing point switches prepared to stop - when a train has proper block authority for the territory on CSX. If there were there would be little need of traffic control systems for dark territory. A significant amount of CSX territory as well as the territory of other Class 1 carriers is Dark, non-signaled territory and operated with some form dark traffic control - eithere DTC (Direct Traffic Control) with specifically defined block limits, or TWC (Track Warrant Control) where the authorized limits can be specified by Mile Post or Control Point references.
That is unfortunate, that rule could have saved two lives.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
243129My agenda as you call it is Amtrak hiring and training procedures that can also apply to all crafts. The above-listed incidents were the result of human error which was the result of poor training which is not unique to Amtrak.
VOLKER LANDWEHR 243129 You and Amtrak cite "decreasing numbers of human errors"? Where? I don't know what Amtrak did, I was assuming a possible scenario. Look onto the tables Charlie Hebdo posted and you see that human error collisions decreased significantly from the 1990s. The accidents you cite are terrible and shouldn't have happened but they don't change the statistics. Everyone has his own way interpreting statistic. You see the cited accidents as warning. Amtrak might have seen the development over the last years and thought that their hiring and training is good enough to reduce human erroraccidents. The pure number of your cited accidents doesn't help if the accidents don't fit regarding engineer training: The accident at Chester was not caused by the engineer. Two others in 2011 were not deemed important enough for NTSB to investigate. At least I found no accident report. 243129 All of the above are attributed to human error yet Amtrak still made no changes to it’s vetting and training procedures. And you believe "management cares"? GMAFB As I said before, a management can care and get to different conclusion than someone "from the trenches". That doesn't say anything if correct or not. But your perspective is not necessarily the only correct, especially in light of thr accident statistic. 243129 Where did you get your information that I was rude to them? Perhaps I was not clear enough that I meant your letters. They were rude and in part insulting. How the meeting went I don't know. 243129 So Herr Landwehr before you launch in to criticizing others get your facts straight. We all make mistakes here Though I don't see were I was wrong. On the other hand you should be more careful choosing the accidents you cite to give your accusations more weight. Chester is the second one after train #91 that doesn't fit your agenda.Regards, Volker
243129 You and Amtrak cite "decreasing numbers of human errors"? Where?
I don't know what Amtrak did, I was assuming a possible scenario. Look onto the tables Charlie Hebdo posted and you see that human error collisions decreased significantly from the 1990s.
The accidents you cite are terrible and shouldn't have happened but they don't change the statistics.
Everyone has his own way interpreting statistic. You see the cited accidents as warning. Amtrak might have seen the development over the last years and thought that their hiring and training is good enough to reduce human erroraccidents.
The pure number of your cited accidents doesn't help if the accidents don't fit regarding engineer training: The accident at Chester was not caused by the engineer. Two others in 2011 were not deemed important enough for NTSB to investigate. At least I found no accident report.
243129 All of the above are attributed to human error yet Amtrak still made no changes to it’s vetting and training procedures. And you believe "management cares"? GMAFB
As I said before, a management can care and get to different conclusion than someone "from the trenches". That doesn't say anything if correct or not. But your perspective is not necessarily the only correct, especially in light of thr accident statistic.
243129 Where did you get your information that I was rude to them?
Perhaps I was not clear enough that I meant your letters. They were rude and in part insulting. How the meeting went I don't know.
243129 So Herr Landwehr before you launch in to criticizing others get your facts straight.
We all make mistakes here Though I don't see were I was wrong. On the other hand you should be more careful choosing the accidents you cite to give your accusations more weight. Chester is the second one after train #91 that doesn't fit your agenda.Regards, Volker
My agenda as you call it is Amtrak hiring and training procedures that can also apply to all crafts. The above-listed incidents were the result of human error which was the result of poor training which is not unique to Amtrak.
VOLKER LANDWEHR 243129 "Where did you get your information that I was rude to them?" Perhaps I was not clear enough that I meant your letters. They were rude and in part insulting. How the meeting went I don't know.
243129 "Where did you get your information that I was rude to them?"
243129: "I informed CTO Nichols that I felt that this 'meeting' was an exercise in futility so I declined lunch and left for New Haven on the next train. Never was there any hostility or rude behavior on my nor anyone's part."
Walking out of a meeting and lunch scheduled as a courtesy for you is very rude, even if you don't think so. That is probably why nobody responded to you since and never will.
243129You and Amtrak cite "decreasing numbers of human errors"? Where?
243129All of the above are attributed to human error yet Amtrak still made no changes to it’s vetting and training procedures. And you believe "management cares"? GMAFB
243129Where did you get your information that I was rude to them?
243129So Herr Landwehr before you launch in to criticizing others get your facts straight.
Similar to Amtrak - Metro North 'relations' on the 51 mile stretch of the NEC that Amtrak DOES NOT OWN.
Another example of Amtrak's 'brilliant' planning.
243129Not being familiar with the territory I can only assume that the Amtrak operator at K tower started the whole process. I can also only assume that the Amtrak engineer could only see that the switches were not properly lined for his route after entering the interlocking. Is this so? Also I might add that 1 hour and 45 minutes seems an excessive delay for the circumstances.
Also I might add that 1 hour and 45 minutes seems an excessive delay for the circumstances.
AF is a geographically large interlocking - I don't know how well the switch points can be read, if at all, before accepting the signal and entering the interlocking. I don't know that an hour and 45 mintues delay was ALL on this incident as I don't know how 'late and out of slot' the train was with it's departure from Union Station. NS has it's own dispatching issues between AF and Charlottesville which could have given additional delay to the run.
The operator at K Tower - for whatever their reasons - don't feel they need to communicate their actions with the CSX Dispatchers both the BC and BD Desks. The BC Desk handles the MARC Camden and Brunswick Line Commuter trains as well as the Capitol Limited. The only 'consistant' communication with K Tower is when K needs signals block off for protection of MofW or other kinds of movements within the area the K Tower controls.
Not being familiar with the territory I can only assume that the Amtrak operator at K tower started the whole process. I can also only assume that the Amtrak engineer could only see that the switches were not properly lined for his route after entering the interlocking. Is this so?
243129July 6, 2016 Amtrak train arrives Charlottesville 1 hour and 45 minutes late after accepting wrong route towards Richmond.
The incident happened at CSX Control Point AF. Multiple divirging routes can be lined at the Control Point. One of the divirging routes is to the NS, there are other CSX divirging routes that can be lined. All Divirging routes display the same signal indication.
The incident was set up by the Amtrak operator at K Tower not notifying the CSX BD Desk of the movement of the NS train and it departed Union Station on the On Time Departure of a VRE Fredericksburg departure. Normal route for all Southbound trains Amtrak and VRE have them departing Union Station on #3 track. Because of how their stations are designed, all VRE's trains operate on #2 track from AF to Fredericksburg. The Amtrak train left the station at Alexandria with the divirging signal indication expecting to go to #4 track which is the Main to the NS; instead after accepting the signal the crew found they were lined to #2 CSX Main track. Upon clearing the Control Point limits Amtrak stopped and communicated with the BD Dispatcher about what happened. The 6th being a Wednesday that happened during the afternoon commuter window.
Complex Control Points, such as AF permit multiple trains to be lined on non-conflicting routes and the Dispatcher has the ability to 'stack' multiple moves into the CADS system that will line signals for the next move as the 1st train completes its move. When signals get lined and a train will not be accepting their indication, the Dispatcher must 'run time' to be able to knock down the signal so another route can be set up and a signal lined for that route. 'Time' on the signals at AF have varying time out values of between 10 and 12 minutes.
I don't know what particular trains the BD Dispatcher was handling when this mistake happend, that being said the Amtrak that ended up on the wrong track had to have a route created to the other side of the control point, and upon reaching the other side have a route lined for it to the NS. While all this is taking place ON TIME VRE trains are continuing to operate to both Manassas (NS) and Fredericksburg (CSX). The Dispatchers aim is to keep as many trains ON TIME as possible. The wayward Amtrak, once the mistake is made, is a lost cause and will be handled as such. The wayward Amtrak train DID NOT depart Union Station in it's own ON TIME time slot.
"It sometimes happens that management cares for the company and believes that their hiring and training procedures are adequate and good enough in the light of decreasing numbers of human errors."
You and Amtrak cite "decreasing numbers of human errors"? Where?
The warning signs have been there and Amtrak has paid no heed despite repeated pleas from their veteran workforce to examine and revamp their training regimen.Here are some of the warning signs Amtrak ignored:
June 3, 2011 Amtrak train collides with Chicago Metra train 12 hurt.October 13, 2011 Amtrak San Joaquin collides with Coast Starlight 17 injured.November, 2013 Amtrak had a New York to Washington Regional train accept the wrong route and wander six miles in the wrong direction to the end of the line on a foreign railroad.May 12, 2015 Amtrak train 188 derails due to excessive speed 8 killed, 200 injured.April 3, 2016 Amtrak train hits company backhoe killing 2 and injuring 39July 6, 2016 Amtrak train arrives Charlottesville 1 hour and 45 minutes late after accepting wrong route towards Richmond.December 12, 2017 Amtrak Cascades train 501 derails killing 3 and injuring 77.All of the above are attributed to human error yet Amtrak still made no changes to it’s vetting and training procedures. And you believe "management cares"? GMAFB
"A content management is confronted with a rudely presented proposol by an ex-employee."
I was still employed at the time that I met with VP Operations Stadtler, who had no previous railroad operations experience, and subsequent meeting with CTO Nichols, System General Road Foreman Hines (does that name ring a bell?), System General Trainmaster Mruk.
Where did you get your information that I was rude to them?
I made my presentation, excerpts are here on this thread. When the meeting adjourned for lunch and sensing the above panel's disinterest in any of my observations/suggestions I informed CTO Nichols that I felt that this 'meeting' was an exercise in futility so I declined lunch and left for New Haven on the next train. Never was there any hostility or rude behavior on my nor anyone's part.
Amtrak is grossly mismanaged and after that meeting I became public with that fact and numerous other shortcomings in an effort to effect change. Now I am branded a disgruntled employee? No I was a disappointed employee now I am a disappointed former employee.
So Herr Landwehr before you launch in to criticizing others get your facts straight.
VOLKER LANDWEHR 243129 If Amtrak truly cared about their product they would entertain help from their experienced employees. They call for employee input and ignore it. It sometimes happens that management cares for the company and believes that their hiring and training procedures are adequate and good enough in the light of decreasing numbers of human errors. Remember you started long before the accidents of trains 188 and 501. A content management is confronted with a rudely presented proposol by an ex-employee. The results we have seen. They don't have to follow employee input even when they asked for. The two last accidents might have changed their mind, but judging by your letters the door will stay closed for you, I think. Too much china already broken. 243129 As I have said before I am reactive not proactive. I treat folks as they treat me. Insult me you will get insulted in return. You play nice I play nice. Very simple. I'd expect that 95% of the posters in this thread see it differently.Regards, Volker
243129 If Amtrak truly cared about their product they would entertain help from their experienced employees. They call for employee input and ignore it.
It sometimes happens that management cares for the company and believes that their hiring and training procedures are adequate and good enough in the light of decreasing numbers of human errors.
Remember you started long before the accidents of trains 188 and 501.
A content management is confronted with a rudely presented proposol by an ex-employee. The results we have seen. They don't have to follow employee input even when they asked for.
The two last accidents might have changed their mind, but judging by your letters the door will stay closed for you, I think. Too much china already broken.
243129 As I have said before I am reactive not proactive. I treat folks as they treat me. Insult me you will get insulted in return. You play nice I play nice. Very simple.
I'd expect that 95% of the posters in this thread see it differently.Regards, Volker
Perhaps you should do a little research before you speak for the 95%
243129As I have said before I am reactive not proactive. I treat folks as they treat me. Insult me you will get insulted in return. You play nice I play nice. Very simple.
Looks like plenty of testing and qualification runs now.
http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Rail/questions-answers-derailment.htm
June 27, 2018 update
Point Defiance Bypass testing, train travel update
Commitment regarding PTC Following the derailment in DuPont on December 18, 2017, WSDOT committed that positive train control (PTC) technology would be fully activated on the corridor before Amtrak Cascades trains return to the Point Defiance Bypass. This decision was made to be sensitive both to the people and communities involved in the incident and our ongoing passengers. We also wanted time to reach out to communities along the bypass before service resumes.
RidershipIn the months following the derailment, Amtrak Cascades trains reverted to the old route along the water between Tacoma and Nisqually. Ridership on Amtrak Cascades has remained stable, with a 5 percent increase in riders in May 2018, compared to May 2017.
PTC statusImplementation of the positive train control system on the entire Amtrak Cascades line, including the Point Defiance Bypass, is progressing well. Amtrak, WSDOT, BNSF and Sound Transit all are working together to implement PTC prior to the national deadline at the end of 2018. The goal is to seamlessly integrate the three elements that must all work together for the system to be fully activated. As of June 2018, the following progress has been made:
The next step in the process is to test the entire system on the rail line. Throughout the summer, trains will be traveling along the bypass conducting various system tests and train crew qualifications. During this testing, expect trains on the bypass traveling at speeds up to 79 mph on both weekdays and weekends. As always, you are encouraged to stay safe around the railroad tracks.
Return to the bypassOnce testing is complete and PTC is fully active, we are planning for Amtrak Cascades trains to return to the Lakewood/JBLM/DuPont bypass this fall, ahead of the federal deadline. We do not have an exact date for that return yet, but will post it as soon as we do.
Electroliner 1935 If I could unsubscribe, I would but it keeps filling my email inbox. So I would like you to stop. You have made your point that Amtak has an unsafe culture as to how it trains an evaluates engineers. You have made your feelings and actions known. You have been given suggestions that you refuse to accept and/or take offense at and keep the string going by challenging anyone's reply with various responses that trolls use to bait and extend the issue. Please stop. And if someone knows how to inscribe from the thread, PLEASE tell me how. Thanks.
If I could unsubscribe, I would but it keeps filling my email inbox. So I would like you to stop. You have made your point that Amtak has an unsafe culture as to how it trains an evaluates engineers. You have made your feelings and actions known. You have been given suggestions that you refuse to accept and/or take offense at and keep the string going by challenging anyone's reply with various responses that trolls use to bait and extend the issue. Please stop.
And if someone knows how to inscribe from the thread, PLEASE tell me how. Thanks.
I am glad that you see my point. If Amtrak truly cared about their product they would entertain help from their experienced employees. They call for employee input and ignore it. Their calls for employee input is 'window dressing' as are their safety programs. They do what is necessary to continue feeding at the government teat.
As I have said before I am reactive not proactive. I treat folks as they treat me. Insult me you will get insulted in return. You play nice I play nice. Very simple.
matthewsaggie You can go to settings and turn off email notifications of any postings. I had to do it years ago. As for this thread, i said it was a pissing contest about 7 pages ago. Its still a pissing contest.
You can go to settings and turn off email notifications of any postings. I had to do it years ago. As for this thread, i said it was a pissing contest about 7 pages ago. Its still a pissing contest.
Obviously you find it interesting because you are still here. Do you have anything of substance to contribute to this thread?
Electroliner 1935 Now we are in a "he said, No, He said" loop. Time for the moderator to end this stupid string.
Now we are in a "he said, No, He said" loop. Time for the moderator to end this stupid string.
Why not just ignore this thread so you won't be so upset?
243129 charlie hebdo You duck when you don't have an answer. I contend that the data does support your notion that hiring and training on Amtrak are getting worse as would be seen by supporting data showing an increase over time (trend such as a moving average). But the official data shows no such thing. Actually it shows the opposite compared to the late 80s. As they say in the South, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." Show me where I "duck when I don't have an answer". That tactic is attributable to you. Here is just one example . "I see that you have dodged my questions again. They are straightforward why can't you answer them?" So your point is that Amtrak's training is acceptable? What data and specifics do you say I don't have? Silence from you. "But the official data shows no such thing. Actually it shows the opposite compared to the late 80s. As they say in the South, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." Oh by the way Chuck #188 and #501, #91 along with the Chatsworth tragedy and others , don't denote a broken system to you?
charlie hebdo You duck when you don't have an answer. I contend that the data does support your notion that hiring and training on Amtrak are getting worse as would be seen by supporting data showing an increase over time (trend such as a moving average). But the official data shows no such thing. Actually it shows the opposite compared to the late 80s. As they say in the South, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."
You duck when you don't have an answer. I contend that the data does support your notion that hiring and training on Amtrak are getting worse as would be seen by supporting data showing an increase over time (trend such as a moving average). But the official data shows no such thing. Actually it shows the opposite compared to the late 80s. As they say in the South, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."
Show me where I "duck when I don't have an answer". That tactic is attributable to you. Here is just one example .
"I see that you have dodged my questions again. They are straightforward why can't you answer them?"
So your point is that Amtrak's training is acceptable?
What data and specifics do you say I don't have?
Silence from you.
"But the official data shows no such thing. Actually it shows the opposite compared to the late 80s. As they say in the South, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."
Oh by the way Chuck #188 and #501, #91 along with the Chatsworth tragedy and others , don't denote a broken system to you?
Confirmation that "You duck when you don't have an answer."
charlie hebdo You are the person complaining that none of the powers that be in Amtrak, etc., would listen to you. Some of us have tried to help you through critiques and suggestions for improvements and changes in approach that might allow your plan to fall on more interested ears. But all you do is reject anything that you preceive as differing from your notions. So be it and good luck over the next four years.
You are the person complaining that none of the powers that be in Amtrak, etc., would listen to you. Some of us have tried to help you through critiques and suggestions for improvements and changes in approach that might allow your plan to fall on more interested ears. But all you do is reject anything that you preceive as differing from your notions. So be it and good luck over the next four years.
That's it??? When confronted you run.
BaltACD 243129 Oh by the way Chuck #188 and #501, #91 along with the Chatsworth tragedy and others , don't denote a broken system to you? In fairness - the Amtrak crew on #91 did nothing wrong. The CSX crew reported Clear of their EC-1 authority when they did not meet the requirements that would permit them to report clear - they left the switch entering the siding their train occupied open to the Main Track.
243129 Oh by the way Chuck #188 and #501, #91 along with the Chatsworth tragedy and others , don't denote a broken system to you?
In fairness - the Amtrak crew on #91 did nothing wrong. The CSX crew reported Clear of their EC-1 authority when they did not meet the requirements that would permit them to report clear - they left the switch entering the siding their train occupied open to the Main Track.
I certainly agree that the crew on #91 was not at fault.
I was attempting to point out albeit unsuccessfully that human error is not unique to Amtrak
243129Oh by the way Chuck #188 and #501, #91 along with the Chatsworth tragedy and others , don't denote a broken system to you?
charlie hebdo I read it. Vague. Are you trusting senior engineers to make a determination about the candidates' character traits? There always problems with peers making those judgments, especially when they lack the training.
I read it. Vague. Are you trusting senior engineers to make a determination about the candidates' character traits? There always problems with peers making those judgments, especially when they lack the training.
Who better to assess a candidate's character traits and acumen for the position of locomotive engineer than a seasoned locomotive engineer.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.