BaltACDI-5 Overpass at MP 18.19; Center Drive Overpass at MP 18.36; South Dupont Switch at MP 18.45; I-5 Onramp Overpass at 18.53, Control Point 188 and it's Absolute Signal and Signal Bungalo MP 18.8; 10 MPH Freight Speed Sign at MP 18.9; MP 19 sign at MP 19.0; Intermediate Signal at MP 19.3.
The engineer had picked the control point/signal at MP 18.8.
From the interview transcript page 44 (pdf-page):Q. Whatever you want to -- however you want to describe it for me.
A. Well, I remember in the 79 area, I remember preparing for the curve. I remember coming up to the crossing at 15.5. It's the last crossing. We blow for that one. And then I was preparing for the curve. And I was counting mileposts. I had a plan, planning on, you know, setting about 12, 13 pounds about a mile before the curve. And I had picked out the control point that I think was labeled 18.96 but it's really 18.8 or something like that. And so I was counting mileposts. Went by 16. Went by 17. I hadn't seen 18, and we went by a signal and I was looking for this big white sign that was -- I think it said CP 18.96, but it was a big white sign. I was looking for it. I was looking for a label. And I hadn't seen milepost 18 and I saw the signal and I -- I didn't see it, and I looked down and I saw the next signal and I said, okay, that next signal must be it. So I kept going. And just before getting to that signal, I saw the 30-mile-an-hour sign for the curve. And I went full service and blended. I anticipated that the train -- or the brakes would grab and it would bring the train down in time to safely go around the curve. I figured it was going to be uncomfortable, I might spill some coffee. The brakes didn't do anything. I didn't feel the brakes grab, nothing. And then the track went that way and we went that way.
Regards, Volker
243129 Their operating department and their training and hiring procedures should be subjected to intense scrutiny from an oversight committee made up of veteran operating department personnel.
Would you volunteer?
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
This reminds me of the NASA culture problem that led to astronaut deaths when the Challenger spacecraft launch blew up. Lower level engineers tried to get the launch stopped but no one would listen. Those who forget the past are condemmed to repeat it.
"I am amazed that it took this long for someone to point out the obvious. One big thing Balt forgot is a Truck weigh station along the northbound lanes of I-5 opposite old Dupont that is always lit up.
There are lots of landmarks in addition to MP 18 and the 30 MPH advance speed board. This is not a tunnel through the trees!
Engineer not qualified in fact, but did not know it. Not qualified by ATK management, who were too ignorant to know what qualified was, or were affraid to throw a red flag. ATK middle management got jammed by Sounder, WSDOT, their bosses, WSDOT, and the political know-nothing class in general."
The "obvious" is the general consensus as has been stated early on in this thread. Amtrak has the unknowing 'teaching' the unknowing. Their operating department and their training and hiring procedures should be subjected to intense scrutiny from an oversight committee made up of veteran operating department personnel.
PNWRMNM BaltACD I-5 Overpass at MP 18.19; Center Drive Overpass at MP 18.36; South Dupont Switch at MP 18.45; I-5 Onramp Overpass at 18.53, Control Point 188 and it's Absolute Signal and Signal Bungalo MP 18.8; 10 MPH Freight Speed Sign at MP 18.9; MP 19 sign at MP 19.0; Intermediate Signal at MP 19.3. If one can't use Interstate or other roadway overpasses or Control Points as valid landmarks for train handling actions - one is not qualified to utilize the controls of a locomotive, let alone one hauling passengers. I am amazed that it took this long for someone to point out the obvious. One big thing Balt forgot is a Truck weigh station along the northbound lanes of I-5 opposite old Dupont that is always lit up. There are lots of landmarks in addition to MP 18 and the 30 MPH advance speed board. This is not a tunnel through the trees! Engineer not qualified in fact, but did not know it. Not qualified by ATK management, who were too ignorant to know what qualified was, or were affraid to throw a red flag. ATK middle management got jammed by Sounder, WSDOT, their bosses, WSDOT, and the political know-nothing class in general. Put the whole mess of ignoramuses out of their misery. Defund Amtrak! Mac
BaltACD I-5 Overpass at MP 18.19; Center Drive Overpass at MP 18.36; South Dupont Switch at MP 18.45; I-5 Onramp Overpass at 18.53, Control Point 188 and it's Absolute Signal and Signal Bungalo MP 18.8; 10 MPH Freight Speed Sign at MP 18.9; MP 19 sign at MP 19.0; Intermediate Signal at MP 19.3. If one can't use Interstate or other roadway overpasses or Control Points as valid landmarks for train handling actions - one is not qualified to utilize the controls of a locomotive, let alone one hauling passengers.
I-5 Overpass at MP 18.19; Center Drive Overpass at MP 18.36; South Dupont Switch at MP 18.45; I-5 Onramp Overpass at 18.53, Control Point 188 and it's Absolute Signal and Signal Bungalo MP 18.8; 10 MPH Freight Speed Sign at MP 18.9; MP 19 sign at MP 19.0; Intermediate Signal at MP 19.3.
If one can't use Interstate or other roadway overpasses or Control Points as valid landmarks for train handling actions - one is not qualified to utilize the controls of a locomotive, let alone one hauling passengers.
I am amazed that it took this long for someone to point out the obvious. One big thing Balt forgot is a Truck weigh station along the northbound lanes of I-5 opposite old Dupont that is always lit up.
Engineer not qualified in fact, but did not know it. Not qualified by ATK management, who were too ignorant to know what qualified was, or were affraid to throw a red flag. ATK middle management got jammed by Sounder, WSDOT, their bosses, WSDOT, and the political know-nothing class in general.
Put the whole mess of ignoramuses out of their misery. Defund Amtrak!
Mac
Reading through a number of the interviews - I got the impression that WSDOT had a large hand in creating the mess - they didn't permit Amtrak to begin 'training' until after Thanksgiving - with intentions of starting revenue service less than a month after practical training started.
It takes a VERY STRONG manager (knowing career suicide is in the offing) to tell the boss that he is dumber than the horse he rode in on and that the schedule that WSDOT is pushing cannot be accomplished and having operating employees actually qualified on the territory. None of the Amtrak Road Foremen or other Amtrak Officials fit the profile of a VERY STRONG manager and no one stood up to WSDOT about their start date.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
How about prosecuting whoever is responsible for certification for failure to provide adequate training?
Johnny
BaltACDIf one can't use Interstate or other roadway overpasses or Control Points as valid landmarks for train handling actions - one is not qualified to utilize the controls of a locomotive, let alone one hauling passengers.
Having only had one or two Southbound trips over the new territory apparently was insufficient for him to learn the route and this indicates he was inadequately trained. Bad training. Fault Amtrak. But he should have been aware that he didn't know it. Fault engineer. Overall responsibility, Amtrak.
It comes down to the management thinking that the it protocols are sufficient and not being willing to verify that proper checks of the training are being done.as evidenced by the testimony of the trainer, and the RFE. Amtrak is in trouble if they don't change their training attitude and attitude. That is my opinion. I await the report.
charlie hebdo BaltACD the Advance Speed Board at the 17.8 was not the ONLY realistic landmark that had the engineer been truly qualified would have been used as braking markers if he deemed the Advance Speed Board was too far from the restriction to take actual braking actions. I wouldn't think the Advance Speed Board would be considered a "landmark." In any case, what would some of those other, easily discernible, distinctive, "realistic" landmarks be?
BaltACD the Advance Speed Board at the 17.8 was not the ONLY realistic landmark that had the engineer been truly qualified would have been used as braking markers if he deemed the Advance Speed Board was too far from the restriction to take actual braking actions.
I wouldn't think the Advance Speed Board would be considered a "landmark." In any case, what would some of those other, easily discernible, distinctive, "realistic" landmarks be?
BaltACD NDG FYI. Dec 2017 Amtrak Cascades Derailment. https://dms.ntsb.gov/public/61000-61499/61332/616896.pdf Thank You. Bringing facts to the conversation.
NDG FYI. Dec 2017 Amtrak Cascades Derailment. https://dms.ntsb.gov/public/61000-61499/61332/616896.pdf Thank You.
In reading the 'transcript' of the video - it is evident that there were multiple unmoveable and unmistakeable land marks that a 'qualified' engineer would coordinate into his knowledge of his route to know his location and that would be reasonable braking markers - the Advance Speed Board at the 17.8 was not the ONLY realistic landmark that had the engineer been truly qualified would have been used as braking markers if he deemed the Advance Speed Board was too far from the restriction to take actual braking actions.
BaltACD NDG FYI. Dec 2017 Amtrak Cascades Derailment. https://dms.ntsb.gov/public/61000-61499/61332/616896.pdf Thank You. Bringing facts to the conversation. As an aside comment - I am not very impressed with the 'armoring' supplied to the Video system and the susceptability of the storage media to be destroyed in a accident.
Also we shouldn't put absolute faith in the pictures provided. It appears that the camera is using automatic exposure compensation in order to present the best overall picture. So when it is darker outside, it increases the time for exposure causing points of light or reflections to be overexposed blobs and the rest of the picture lighter than the actual conditions. This could be remedied by having some frames without compensation.
In figure 2 at 7:32:14 we see the corner post, possibly the wipers, and a dark line in the upper left corner. In figure 3 and some other figures these are missing, suggesting that some images were zoomed and cropped for this presentation.
In figure 3 listed as at 7:32:21, we can see the yellow advance warning sign, which was already passed at 7:32:16. The 7:32:21 time is probably an error.
Unfortunately the engineer turned his head to the right at 7:32:14 probably to check instruments on the second screen. The first screen right in front of him was dark awaiting PTC. I did a semi-scientific test in front of a digital clock and found that it takes about 1 second or less to glance my eyes down to check an instrument on the first screen. However, to turn my head to the right, see the displayed instrument on the second screen and then turn my head forward, it took about 2 to 3 seconds. I say this test was semi-scientific because I don't know how hard the information was to read or how much information was read. Also we don't know how the brightness of the screen affected the engineer's vision. This is probably something for human factors to study.
zugmann rdamon That is chilling to read. I agree that the recorder should not have been damaged that bad. Was it physically damaged, or was there a power issue? I'm guessing when they tip over at speed it probably opens up every breaker there is on the engine?
rdamon That is chilling to read. I agree that the recorder should not have been damaged that bad.
Was it physically damaged, or was there a power issue? I'm guessing when they tip over at speed it probably opens up every breaker there is on the engine?
As I read the disclaimer - it was from physical damage. If so, very poor form for such a device. Electrical issuse may have caused recording to stop - but it was said the media was damaged by weather.
rdamonThat is chilling to read. I agree that the recorder should not have been damaged that bad.
That is chilling to read. I agree that the recorder should not have been damaged that bad.
Amtrak's human error accidents are the result of poor training.The engineers on #188 and #508 had no idea where they were. Yes technology would have saved those lives but it was poor training that took them.
243129 charlie hebdo There are reasons why aircraft and the airlines have adopted increasingly complex technologies for navigation and control. And that is why the number of fatal accidents has dropped to zero for several years, the reduction in human error factor. Why was it that PTC had to be mandated? Same reason that Janney couplers, airbrakes, etc. had to be mandated: the railroads typically won't spend the money to adopt advanced technology unless forced to. After several human- (read: engineer)error fatal crashes, the government stepped in, but through influence of the industry, it mandated an unproven approach (would have been better to have adopted tested and proven approaches used abroad?) and has required extensions of time to adopt and install (with more accidents in the interval). And now we hear a retired engineer on here suggesting it takes years of on-the-job experience to learn a route and that we should return to having firemen aboard as apprentices. And he and others maintaining that because technology can fail, we should not rely on it because the engineers (or pilots) lose their skills. Perhaps we should return to TT and train order operation or the British token railway signaling or ball signals? So Cognitive Charlie according to your thinking. Complex technologies are the be all to end all. So how about we have an Amtrak trained engineer put out on the main line with all the latest technologies merrily roaring along at 125-150 mph and they fail. Now what do you suggest Cognitive Charlie? What about situational awareness? What about the next speed restriction? How do we find those?
charlie hebdo There are reasons why aircraft and the airlines have adopted increasingly complex technologies for navigation and control. And that is why the number of fatal accidents has dropped to zero for several years, the reduction in human error factor. Why was it that PTC had to be mandated? Same reason that Janney couplers, airbrakes, etc. had to be mandated: the railroads typically won't spend the money to adopt advanced technology unless forced to. After several human- (read: engineer)error fatal crashes, the government stepped in, but through influence of the industry, it mandated an unproven approach (would have been better to have adopted tested and proven approaches used abroad?) and has required extensions of time to adopt and install (with more accidents in the interval). And now we hear a retired engineer on here suggesting it takes years of on-the-job experience to learn a route and that we should return to having firemen aboard as apprentices. And he and others maintaining that because technology can fail, we should not rely on it because the engineers (or pilots) lose their skills. Perhaps we should return to TT and train order operation or the British token railway signaling or ball signals?
There are reasons why aircraft and the airlines have adopted increasingly complex technologies for navigation and control. And that is why the number of fatal accidents has dropped to zero for several years, the reduction in human error factor.
Why was it that PTC had to be mandated? Same reason that Janney couplers, airbrakes, etc. had to be mandated: the railroads typically won't spend the money to adopt advanced technology unless forced to. After several human- (read: engineer)error fatal crashes, the government stepped in, but through influence of the industry, it mandated an unproven approach (would have been better to have adopted tested and proven approaches used abroad?) and has required extensions of time to adopt and install (with more accidents in the interval).
And now we hear a retired engineer on here suggesting it takes years of on-the-job experience to learn a route and that we should return to having firemen aboard as apprentices. And he and others maintaining that because technology can fail, we should not rely on it because the engineers (or pilots) lose their skills.
Perhaps we should return to TT and train order operation or the British token railway signaling or ball signals?
So Cognitive Charlie according to your thinking. Complex technologies are the be all to end all.
So how about we have an Amtrak trained engineer put out on the main line with all the latest technologies merrily roaring along at 125-150 mph and they fail. Now what do you suggest Cognitive Charlie? What about situational awareness? What about the next speed restriction? How do we find those?
I never said that. However, these advances in technology you seem to think lead to addiction likely would have prevented the Philly crash and the Cascades crash, both of which were humn error. Your idea is that goof-proof engineers can be created with more and better training. Yes, better training is needed, but the technology is present now and would prevent this sort of accident. You and others keep coming up with "what ifs" about failing signalling technology and how suspect PTC is, but in the past several years the Amtrak (and other freight) accidents have not been caused by that but by human error.
Not using techology any time ? That is a straw dog. Know some pilots that as a part of each flight manually fly an aircraft to maintain proficency and for novices hone their skills. It is easy enough to see what the automation calls for and duplicate those skills manally operating an aircraft. Know one pilot that experienced total electrical and electronic failures 3 times which ended up as being no significant incidents. Imagine flying into a busy airport with no radio ? We would imagine the same applies to operating trains.
VOLKER LANDWEHR 243129 What part of "technology" being an aid that can and will fail don't you guys get? Sure technology can fail, as can and will the best trained human. If one of both fails the other has to step in. You need both best training and best technology.I haven't seen one person during my working life that hadn't made mistakes. Regards, Volker
243129 What part of "technology" being an aid that can and will fail don't you guys get?
Sure technology can fail, as can and will the best trained human. If one of both fails the other has to step in. You need both best training and best technology.I haven't seen one person during my working life that hadn't made mistakes. Regards, Volker
Never was I against technology. I am against automated addiction and the lack of proper training as to what actions should be taken when technology fails.
243129What part of "technology" being an aid that can and will fail don't you guys get?
What part of "technology" being an aid that can and will fail don't you guys get?
technology: the application of scientific knowledge for practical purposes
By putting the word in quotes, I suppose there is some sort of implied change of definition.
Consider that the flanged wheel on rail is technology. True, it does fail. Often enough to not rely on it? Or how about ABS signaling. Fail? Sure. Often enough to not rely on it?
Of course, when the two examples DO fail, it's the guy(s) on the front end who have some pretty quick decisions to make.
Do consider that there is a rail-guided transportation mechanism that millions ride on every day that relies totally on "technology". It is an elevator.
Ed
" If it was made by man it WILL FAIL, when, where, how and why are all unknown."
Exactly and this is where proper training steps in i.e. determining your location via intimate knowledge of the territory ,and this is for Cognitive Charlie, use the "antiquated" practice of using visual landmarks.
VOLKER LANDWEHR BaltACD If it was made by man it WILL FAIL, when, where, how and why are all unknown. If it is human you can say the same. It is only a question of when not if. It is not either human or technology, it is both.Regards, Volker
BaltACD If it was made by man it WILL FAIL, when, where, how and why are all unknown.
If it is human you can say the same. It is only a question of when not if. It is not either human or technology, it is both.Regards, Volker
Safety requires the best of both technology and operator knowledge and qualification beyond the technology. Either one without the other leaves a gapping hole in the safety equation.
charlie hebdo BaltACD 7j43k When pilots are lost or disoriented, they are supposed to trust their instruments, not their intuition or where they "think" they are. Ed Primarily because the are above the clouds and have no skymarks to guide them. While Commercial Pilots are required to have instrument (IFR) and a bunch of other specific rating qualifications to be able to get in the cockpit. The most basic of Pilots License is VFR. Visual Flight Rules - looking for and responding to recognizable landmarks. If they can't see the land they have exceeded their qualifications. So next time you fly, get some private pilot to fly you VFR in a little Cessna and hope the high ceiling holds up.
BaltACD 7j43k When pilots are lost or disoriented, they are supposed to trust their instruments, not their intuition or where they "think" they are. Ed Primarily because the are above the clouds and have no skymarks to guide them. While Commercial Pilots are required to have instrument (IFR) and a bunch of other specific rating qualifications to be able to get in the cockpit. The most basic of Pilots License is VFR. Visual Flight Rules - looking for and responding to recognizable landmarks. If they can't see the land they have exceeded their qualifications.
7j43k When pilots are lost or disoriented, they are supposed to trust their instruments, not their intuition or where they "think" they are. Ed Primarily because the are above the clouds and have no skymarks to guide them. While Commercial Pilots are required to have instrument (IFR) and a bunch of other specific rating qualifications to be able to get in the cockpit.
Primarily because the are above the clouds and have no skymarks to guide them. While Commercial Pilots are required to have instrument (IFR) and a bunch of other specific rating qualifications to be able to get in the cockpit.
The most basic of Pilots License is VFR. Visual Flight Rules - looking for and responding to recognizable landmarks. If they can't see the land they have exceeded their qualifications.
So next time you fly, get some private pilot to fly you VFR in a little Cessna and hope the high ceiling holds up.
And when ALL the instruments on a commercial flight FAIL. What will the pilot do when all instruments are GONE and he is now in sight of the ground? If it was made by man it WILL FAIL, when, where, how and why are all unknown.
7j43k When pilots are lost or disoriented, they are supposed to trust their instruments, not their intuition or where they "think" they are. Ed
7j43kWhen pilots are lost or disoriented, they are supposed to trust their instruments, not their intuition or where they "think" they are. Ed
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.