HawkShack.com

To all my shack friends, I am hoping and praying for the safety of all of you and yours. This is a terrible accident and I truly hope that the families impacted can find some peace and solace at this time of year.

10-4. I had a Facebook friend that was several hundred feet away when the accident happened, close enough to see the cars dangling from the overpass. Our thoughts are with the victims and their families.

There could be hell to pay as a result of this accident. Although the cause is unknown, the mayor of the city the accident happened had issued a stern warning expressing safety concerns just a few weeks ago. Certainly the priority now is getting everybody safe and investigating the cause, but my gut tells me that there's going to be some heads rolling before all is said and done.

Hear hear, ID.

I read the train was going ~80mph around a corner where it should have been slowed to 30mph- not that it makes any dif to the families who've lost people today, but I hope the engineer (is that still what they're called?) doesn't test positive for anything illicit if true.

burrrton wrote:Hear hear, ID.

I read the train was going ~80mph around a corner where it should have been slowed to 30mph- not that it makes any dif to the families who've lost people today, but I hope the engineer (is that still what they're called?) doesn't test positive for anything illicit if true.

Where did you hear that? Not that I don't trust you, but I haven't heard anything about the train's speed at the time of the accident. Do you have a link?

burrrton wrote:Hear hear, ID.

I read the train was going ~80mph around a corner where it should have been slowed to 30mph- not that it makes any dif to the families who've lost people today, but I hope the engineer (is that still what they're called?) doesn't test positive for anything illicit if true.

RiverDog wrote:Where did you hear that? Not that I don't trust you, but I haven't heard anything about the train's speed at the time of the accident. Do you have a link?

Riv,

Earlier on a news conference they said the train was going 71MPH on a stretch that was rated for 69MPH. I don't think the 2MPH is what caused this accident. My question is: How did they test the track and service? E.g. when you go to Disney or Busch Gardens when the roller coaster breaks down, they put 180lbs dummys in every seat and run that around the tracks a few times before they ever let humans back on the rides. Did they do that with the Amtrak route? I sure hope they did.

I read it on Tacoma Tribune or something- I'll try to find the link, but yeah, take it as unsubstantiated for now.

Earlier on a news conference they said the train was going 71MPH on a stretch that was rated for 69MPH. I don't think the 2MPH is what caused this accident

Same article explained that that 69-vs-71 was for the straightaways, not this curve it was purportedly on.

Again, though, let me try to track down my link.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/am ... on-n830751

http://www.cnn.com/2017/12/18/us/amtrak ... index.html

Most of the route was graded for a maximum speed of 79 miles per hour; the speed limit on the corner where the crash occurred is 30 miles per hour, said Rachelle Cunningham with Sound Transit. Cunningham said she did not know how fast the train was traveling when it derailed, and the NTSB has not released information about the speed.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/12/18/us/amtrak ... index.html

Seem to be all from similar sources, but I think they got this data from the, umm, tracking(?) they have in the trains (no idea how this got verified so quickly if so):

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/am ... on-n830751

I've been reading the same reports of the train going 80mph in a curve graded for 30mph. It's hard to believe the operator would be so unaware or negligent of the rules, especially on their maiden run.

Having been to Japan recently, I have a new appreciation of how far ahead that country's rail system is. Their high speed train (called Shinkansen) is not only 3 times faster than the top speed of the train that derailed today, but it's also by far the safest train system in the world due to a number of innovative reasons (not even mentioning the meticulous maintenance they put in every day). For example:

- they run on an independent track system that doesn't intersect with road traffic (traffic goes over and under), or even other train traffic - therefore they physically can't collide with traffic
- the trains have an automatic sensor system that doesn't allow any train to get closer than 1km to another train, otherwise brakes will be automatically applied
- the trains automatically stop if there is any earthquake activity detected at the main control cente
- the operators use a system of physical gestures to show that they are paying attention to speed zones, passing signage, and whatnot. It looks silly when you observe them pointing to stuff t no one in particular, but their precision and safety record is more than impressive

Of course, Japan puts far more resources into their trains than we do in the US, since in the big picture it's a much more efficient for them to move massive amounts of people over land via train rather than by air. They have a much smaller geographical area to cover, but I could the US doing something similar on both coasts and having it pay off in the long run.

Condolences to all those who were affected by the tragic accident this morning.

Thanks, burr. I hadn't seen that.

It was a brand new track and you would have to assume that it's undergone a bunch of testing, so we can probably rule out a problem with track installation or design. I did hear a rumor that someone saw an object on the tracks.

We do know that the speed limit on the curve was 30 mph, and just looking at the carnage, it's hard to believe that had it derailed at the 30mph speed limit for the curve that you wouldn't see the same degree of devastation even considering that there was an overpass involved. My bet is that the root cause was speeding.

Of course, Japan puts far more resources into their trains than we do in the US, since in the big picture it's a much more efficient for them to move massive amounts of people over land via train rather than by air. They have a much smaller geographical area to cover, but I could the US doing something similar on both coasts and having it pay off in the long run.

Tiny geographical area with a heavily concentrated population.

HSR works great in specific circumstances (and yeah, the Japanese system is state of the art, and badass)- in a place like the US, it's not *close* to cost-efficient enough to be worth implementing. Look at all the money CA is lighting on fire in pursuit of it (it's outrageous), and look at what they hope to have at the end of that rainbow (it's meager, if not useless), for the perfect illustration.

RiverDog wrote:Thanks, burr. I hadn't seen that.

It was a brand new track and you would have to assume that it's undergone a bunch of testing, so we can probably rule out a problem with track installation or design. I did hear a rumor that someone saw an object on the tracks.

We do know that the speed limit on the curve was 30 mph, and just looking at the carnage, it's hard to believe that had it derailed at the 30mph speed limit for the curve that you wouldn't see the same degree of devastation even considering that there was an overpass involved. My bet is that the root cause was speeding.

A high speed railway with a 30mph turn? That's like putting a Roundabout on the Autobahn. Makes ZERO sense. Poor engineering.

Sox-n-hawks wrote:A high speed railway with a 30mph turn? That's like putting a Roundabout on the Autobahn. Makes ZERO sense. Poor engineering.

That's what the mayor of the city where the turn is located in said just two weeks ago. And what's worse, this was the inaugural run, a ribbon cutting event.

It looks like burrton was right, the train was traveling around 80mph. The NTSB confirmed that last night at a briefing:

The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) said overnight Tuesday that the train was traveling 80 mph in a 30-mph zone, according to the black box recovered from the accident.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/amtrak-train-speed-limit-derailed-washington-state-ntsb/story?id=51878888

Couple things come to mind.

1. Being the inaugural run, it may have been that the conductor just didn't know the route enough to know to slow down. (I know he should have, but just like the Seahawks in their first game of the season, they are not very good at their job)
2. If there was an object on the track, was it a fallen branch (e.g. accident), was it placed there on purpose to create an accident? Was it a terror motivated motif or was it to prove a point motif?

There's a lot of questions still to go through and we'll find them out going forward. For now, all we can do is keep the victim's families in our thoughts and/or prayers over this holiday season. I hope they all find some peace.

2. If there was an object on the track, was it a fallen branch (e.g. accident), was it placed there on purpose to create an accident? Was it a terror motivated motif or was it to prove a point motif?

This might be a stupid question, but aren't trains supposed to be nearly 100% immune to anything being on the tracks? I thought their sheer weight rendered anything short of a titanium skateboard ramp completely irrelevant to the train.

One of the new articles I saw mentioned the possibility of the operator being distracted by another person (trainee) in the room. Very dangerous if true.

I-5 wrote:One of the new articles I saw mentioned the possibility of the operator being distracted by another person (trainee) in the room. Very dangerous if true.

Yes, I heard that, too. But they are just speculating. As far as I know, they have not yet interviewed any of the crew and even when they do, it's not certain that those severely injured crewmen will have a clear, accurate recollection of the events.

But having said that, it would seem enivedable that operator error was one of if not the leading cause of this accident. We know that the train was going over twice the speed that the curve was rated for when the accident occured. I can think of no other rational reason why it would be going that fast.

Interesting that the technology to stop a speeding train was to be installed on this new section in just a few weeks. It's not clear if this feature would have prevented this accident, but it does show that officials were anxious to get this section of the run into operation. DOT officials are going to have some 'splainin to do.

I agree, operator error is going to be an inevitable factor...we'll see how it plays out. Being distracted for even a moment in a giant piece of machinery moving at that speed can be fatal. Similarly, there is a story of an Aeroflot (flight 593) pilot who allowed his teen son into the cockpit during a flight and let him sit in the captain's seat, but no one noticed that the son had inadvertantly flipped the auto pilot into the off position and started the plane a big turn and eventually a steep dive. By the time the crew became aware, they overcompensated and put the plane into an unrecoverable stall.

I-5 wrote:I agree, operator error is going to be an inevitable factor...we'll see how it plays out. Being distracted for even a moment in a giant piece of machinery moving at that speed can be fatal. Similarly, there is a story of an Aeroflot (flight 593) pilot who allowed his teen son into the cockpit during a flight and let him sit in the captain's seat, but no one noticed that the son had inadvertantly flipped the auto pilot into the off position and started the plane a big turn and eventually a steep dive. By the time the crew became aware, they overcompensated and put the plane into an unrecoverable stall.

I'm all but certain that trains are equipped with GPS that issues warnings to the operator if they go into a new speed zone and haven't reduced their speed. Heck, my Garmin gives me that information as I'm driving. If the locomotive was properly equipped, there should have been warning bells and red lights flashing everywhere to reduce speed. If my assumption is correct, it must have been one helluva a distraction for the operator to have been distracted.

I'm wondering if since this was an ignaugaral run, if they hadn't finished programming the GPS information into the locomotive's navigator, making the operator unaware he was approaching a turn.

RiverDog wrote:I'm all but certain that trains are equipped with GPS that issues warnings to the operator if they go into a new speed zone and haven't reduced their speed. Heck, my Garmin gives me that information as I'm driving. If the locomotive was properly equipped, there should have been warning bells and red lights flashing everywhere to reduce speed. If my assumption is correct, it must have been one helluva a distraction for the operator to have been distracted.

I'm wondering if since this was an ignaugaral run, if they hadn't finished programming the GPS information into the locomotive's navigator, making the operator unaware he was approaching a turn.

That’s my thinking to. He would have had of been passed out to not hear the speed limit alarms going off. Trains also automatically come to a stop if the conductor hasn’t touched a button in a certain amount of time or is going way too fast. Operator error may be the overall reason for the accident but it seems other things were at play as well.

I too read that the GPS speed hadn't yet been programmed that would have automatically slowed the train down. I don't really trust any tracks in the US to be able to safely contain high speed trains along curves, knowing how little they are maintained and how poorly they are funded.

how poorly they are funded.

I don't know what we spend on maintaining existing railroad tracks, but funding is an odd thing to complain about with regard to HSR.

I guess you could complain that we don't build enough systems because the cost is prohibitive, but where we *are* building them, the amount of money we throw at them is obscene.

burrrton wrote:I don't know what we spend on maintaining existing railroad tracks, but funding is an odd thing to complain about with regard to HSR.

I guess you could complain that we don't build enough systems because the cost is prohibitive, but where we *are* building them, the amount of money we throw at them is obscene.

Yea, that statement caught my eye, too. Maintenence is in all liklihood not one of the causes of this accident as it was the inagural run on a section of track that had just had $100M+ worth of improvements to allow it to handle HSR.

The problem with HSR in this country is aquiring the land needed to build a dedicated roadway that has very limited grade crossings. They're finding that out in California, where their $64 billion (yes, that's with a 'b') HSR project is facing multiple environmental and other lawsuits over construction of the roadway. That thing is going to end up costing CA taxpayers 3 or 4 times that, and it's just going to go from SF to LA with no feeder lines.

Until they find a cheaper way to build it, it's never going to be a viable mode of transportation in this country except for some very limited corridors like Boston-DC.

That thing is going to end up costing CA taxpayers 3 or 4 times that, and it's just going to go from SF to LA with no feeder lines.

It's been a while since I read anything on it, but I think most reasonable estimates put it much, much, MUCH higher than that for SF<-->LA.

The current cost overruns are merely for a stretch of it going from nowhere to nowhere, aren't they?

burrrton wrote:It's been a while since I read anything on it, but I think most reasonable estimates put it much, much, MUCH higher than that for SF<-->LA.

The current cost overruns are merely for a stretch of it going from nowhere to nowhere, aren't they?

The current estimates are in the $60-$70B range for Phase 1 line that will run from SF to Anaheim via Fresno. They have conceived a Phase 2 that would connect Sacramento and San Diego to the system.

But courts just recently decided that federal rail law does not supercede CA's very restrictive envirnmental laws, and there's bound to be scores of them in the years to come, and like you, I expect that cost to triple.

And really, the need isn't in intercity transportation, ie to/from LA and SF. If they really want to get cars off the street, they should improve their metro transit systems.