Amtrak says.... About accident of 371-30

[Navy 118]

from Gene Poon of trainorders.com

Amtrak has acknowledged, in the aftermath of the wreck of Train 371(30), the Pere Marquette, the following:

The train crossed from Main Track One to Main Track Two at an interlocking approx. 1 1/2 miles prior to the location of the crash.

The dispatcher knew a freight train was standing on Main Track Two ahead of the Amtrak train. This fact was not communicated to the Amtrak crew (nor did it have to be, the signal aspect says this is a possibility and the Amtrak crew was required to be prepared for the possibility...read further. -GP)

A relief engineer had boarded the train due to possible Hours of Service expiration of the originating engineer. However, since those Hours of Service had not yet actually expired, the originating engineer was still operating Train 371(30).

The signal at the interlocking where the train crossed from Main Track One to Main Track Two required operation of the train at Restricted Speed, such that the crew control the movement to permit stopping within one half the range of vision short of...among other things...other trains or railroad equipment occupying or fouling the track, not to exceed 20mph outside interlocking limits and 15mph within interlocking limits.

The train proceeded through the interlocking at the prescribed 15mph and then sped up, exceeding Restricted Speed and colliding with the standing freight train occupying the same track.

Amtrak specifies the following actions to prevent this from happening again:

Employees are permitted to ride the head end only in performance of their duties and must not interfere with the engineer's observations, vigilance and operation, while being themselves vigilant to conditions. In addition to required radio communications of observed signal aspects, all such employees in the cab who are qualified on operating rules must be alert to signals and call out signals to each other when seen. Any discrepancy must be resolved immediately. If the engineer fails to reduce speed or stop when required, any other such employee in the cab must take immediate action.

Amtrak rules require that a signal aspect requiring speed reduction, a stop at the next signal, operation at Restricted Speed, or a move to a diverging route be called out with train identification, signal name and track number by radio. A crew member in the train must acknowledge. More restrictive rules apply on some railroads (including Norfolk Southern, where the collision occurred); if so, those rules must be complied with.

Amtrak further specifies that proper technical knowledge (of the differing rules and signal aspects that may apply to a single train traveling its route), awareness of the situation that an involved train is encountering (such as a signal not being capable of displaying an aspect that the engineer may be calling out), and communications among employees in case an error is made, could have prevented this crash.

 

[yarrow]

why did the amtrak train speed up when it should have stopped? are they saying the people in the cab were not paying attention and calling out signals?

 

[daveyb99]

The train crossed from Main Track One to Main Track Two at an interlocking approx. 1 1/2 miles prior to the location of the crash.

The dispatcher knew a freight train was standing on Main Track Two ahead of the Amtrak train. This fact was not communicated to the Amtrak crew (nor did it have to be, the signal aspect says this is a possibility and the Amtrak crew was required to be prepared for the possibility...read further. -GP)

The train proceeded through the interlocking at the prescribed 15mph and then sped up, exceeding Restricted Speed and colliding with the standing freight train occupying the same track.

OK, explain to me how a train dispatcher can route a moving train onto the track of a stopped train, not tell anyone, not give a signal of that to anyone, and expect the train crew to see the stopped train in time.

Something is wrong with that scenario.

 

[AmtrakWPK]

The signal at the interlocking where the train crossed from Main Track One to Main Track Two required operation of the train at Restricted Speed, such that the crew control the movement to permit stopping within one half the range of vision short of...among other things...other trains or railroad equipment occupying or fouling the track, not to exceed 20mph outside interlocking limits and 15mph within interlocking limits.
The train proceeded through the interlocking at the prescribed 15mph and then sped up, exceeding Restricted Speed and colliding with the standing freight train occupying the same track.

If this is true, then the train broke the restricted speed rule. They had to travel at a speed allowing them to stop the train in half the distance to any train they approached. Obviously they did not do that, or there would not have been a collision. They were traveling way too fast to stop, even though the engineer did put the train into emergency. We still don't know how or why that happened. We just know for sure that it did happen. It is not unknown for dispatchers to allow that kind of movement. If the train had obeyed restricted speed, it would not have traveled faster than a speed slow enough to allow them to stop the train in less than half the distance to any other train or fouled track ahead of them, as and when they would have first perceived it. That would have meant traveling VERY slowly around that curved section of track, since there was a freight on each adjacent track which would have obstructed their view of their own track ahead. From the video, though, they were obvjously moving much faster than that "restricted" standard.

 

[PRR 60]

OK, explain to me how a train dispatcher can route a moving train onto the track of a stopped train, not tell anyone, not give a signal of that to anyone, and expect the train crew to see the stopped train in time.
Something is wrong with that scenario.

The signal that the Amtrak train passed told them exactly that. That signal told the crew there could be a train or any other obstruction ahead and that they should proceed at a restricted speed not to exceed 20 mph and be prepared to stop in one half the sight distance. One could certainly argue that the dispatcher should have told them the block was occupied, but nothing required the dispatcher to do that and, by the applicable rules, the displayed signal was warning enough. These types of restrictions are displayed and obeyed all the time without accidents.
In this case, for whatever reason, the Amtrak engineer ignored or did not comprehend the meaning of the signal, sped up to 40mph in an occupied block, and the rest is history. The fortunate thing is that the train did not have the chance to get to even a greater speed. If that had happened the consequences would have been far more tragic.

Right now we have a pretty good handle on what happened. Why it happened is the unknown and for that I'll rely upon the expertise of the NTSB.

 

[RailBirder]

[OK, explain to me how a train dispatcher can route a moving train onto the track of a stopped train, not tell anyone, not give a signal of that to anyone, and expect the train crew to see the stopped train in time.

Something is wrong with that scenario.

That's how it's done. That's how signals work. When trains are stacked up, they have to wait until the train ahead gets moving. When the train ahead gets moving, the waiting train gets a better signal.

 

[Amtrak OBS Gone Freight]

The train crossed from Main Track One to Main Track Two at an interlocking approx. 1 1/2 miles prior to the location of the crash.

The dispatcher knew a freight train was standing on Main Track Two ahead of the Amtrak train. This fact was not communicated to the Amtrak crew (nor did it have to be, the signal aspect says this is a possibility and the Amtrak crew was required to be prepared for the possibility...read further. -GP)

The train proceeded through the interlocking at the prescribed 15mph and then sped up, exceeding Restricted Speed and colliding with the standing freight train occupying the same track.

OK, explain to me how a train dispatcher can route a moving train onto the track of a stopped train, not tell anyone, not give a signal of that to anyone, and expect the train crew to see the stopped train in time.

Something is wrong with that scenario.

If I recieve a "restricting signal" (on CSX old SLC signals it is usually a lunar white where the yellow apsect would normally be under a red light depending on its configuration on the mast) I must ascertain my engineer I am working with is operating our train at a speed of one half the range of our vision not to exceed 15mph. This signal permits a train to enter an occupied block/track, but directs us to pay close attention to the track conditions ahead! That one half the range of vision rule can even mean a speed less than 15mph! If we can't see far enough ahead to bring the train to a stop short of a train, car, red signal, or any other obstruction, we have to slow down (even if it is 1 or 2mph) to a speed which we can stay under control! This is one of the reasons I do not like the way some of the jobs are set up Amtrak where there is only one man on the head end! I really believe there needs to be two sets of eyes up there. Not that it made any difference in this one, but I just see it that way!

That is the purpose of a "restricted signal!" It allows the dispatcher to line trains up for movement in the best he/she can as they technically move us from point A to B. Most of the time the dispatcher tells us what is happening ahead or what his/her plans are with our movement! But as a conductor I (and my engineer) am still responsible for the safe movement of our train. It is not always possible for the dispatcher communicate with us at every minute as most of the time my train is not the only train on the line! In fact most dispatchers cover a couple of territories including the one I am working on at the time.

While I won't comment on what I think happened in that particular situation, I believe there were many factors involved ranging from the new help to possible crew fatique.

OBS gone freight...

 

[Joel N. Weber II]

Automobiles are generally operated by one person, and there can certainly be more than one automobile in the equivalent space of a block of the railroad signaling system. Of course, the complication with the trains is that the brakes are less effective, and a single driver's mistake generally doesn't affect hundreds of people.

However, the meaning of a yellow light to the driver of an automobile doesn't really seem to change much from one part of the country to another, whereas the mix of railroad signals in different places having different meanings and fatigue could certainly lead to mistakes. Are there any railroads on which red over yellow does permit 40mph?

 

[battalion51]

Red over solid yellow on CSX is a Medium Approach whch will permit you to proceed at Medium Speed, 30 MPH. Still not quite there. Red over Flashing Yellow will give you a Limited Approach which will allow you to proceed at 45 MPH. Now I could be wrong here, but I seem to recall that the NS rule book (which the train was operating on) calls for Passenger Medium Speed to be 40 MPH and Freight to be 30 MPH, again I could be wrong here. So it is feasible that he read it as Medium Approach (CSX Signal) and proceeded at an NS speed. But the kicker is that the train slowed to 15 to comply with the restricting, and then sped up. I'm not aware of a signal on any railroad called Restricting Clear or Restricting Approach which would so closely match that. The closest is Slow Approach or Slow Clear, and I believe Slow Speed is 20 MPH.

The short and sweet version of what needs to happen is this. One consolidated rule book. One set of signal indications. All the major railroads need to agree to get on with a GCORish/NORACish rule book, and make everyone's life easier.

 

[had8ley]

The short and sweet version of what needs to happen is this. One consolidated rule book. One set of signal indications. All the major railroads need to agree to get on with a GCORish/NORACish rule book, and make everyone's life easier.

Nothing, absolutely nothing, comes easy on any railroad. Look at the complications we face as passengers let alone the operating crews on Amtrak. A Superintendent once told me that the rule book was written in blood; the blood of those who died for lack of a rule. Each railroad took a lot of pride in their own individual rule book. Granted, the time has come for a uniform GCOR but I do not see it coming from the railroads unless the FRA steps in and twists their arms. I don't see that anytime in the near future. And if the FRA stepped in each and every railroad would step up to the plate looking for federal dollars to conform their signals and rules to a single rule book.

 

[George Harris]

But the kicker is that the train slowed to 15 to comply with the restricting, and then sped up.

15 mph could have been the speed limit for the crossover. Likely was if it was a No. 10 which is a very common low speed main line crossover / turnout size in the East. Therefore, he likely took the signal as being appropriate to the crossover and was of the impression that he could return to track speed once the end of the train cleared the crossover.

And:

However, the meaning of a yellow light to the driver of an automobile doesn't really seem to change much from one part of the country to another, . . .

This has not been true for that long, and is still not completely true. In some localities, yellow is a shade of red and in others it is a shade of green. In other words, in some jurisdictions you can get a ticket for running a yellow that is the same as the one for running a red if you are judged to have had time to stop. At one time New York City did not even have yellow. Lights went directly from green to red. There used to be places where the green was on top instead of on the bottom. There was one town I used to drive through regularly that had lights with one bulb in the center for each level so that for one street the green was on top and the other it was on the bottom, and the light cycles were green->yellow->red->yellow->green, etc. This has gradually changed due to development of the Uniform Manual of Traffic Control Devices, Federal funding, restrictions on Federal funding, court decisions, and the simple desire to appear modern in some jurisdictions.

In the era of 100 to 200 mile crew districts and 100 miles = one day's pay and only limited operations of a crew on multiple railroads variation in signal standards was much less of a problem than it is now. Also, in the past, passenger train engineers were usually at the top of the company's engineer seniority roster, so most of these guys knew every inch of the railroad they ran on like the back of their hand.

 

[Amtrak OBS Gone Freight]

Red over solid yellow on CSX is a Medium Approach whch will permit you to proceed at Medium Speed, 30 MPH. Still not quite there. Red over Flashing Yellow will give you a Limited Approach which will allow you to proceed at 45 MPH. Now I could be wrong here, but I seem to recall that the NS rule book (which the train was operating on) calls for Passenger Medium Speed to be 40 MPH and Freight to be 30 MPH, again I could be wrong here. So it is feasible that he read it as Medium Approach (CSX Signal) and proceeded at an NS speed. But the kicker is that the train slowed to 15 to comply with the restricting, and then sped up. I'm not aware of a signal on any railroad called Restricting Clear or Restricting Approach which would so closely match that. The closest is Slow Approach or Slow Clear, and I believe Slow Speed is 20 MPH.
The short and sweet version of what needs to happen is this. One consolidated rule book. One set of signal indications. All the major railroads need to agree to get on with a GCORish/NORACish rule book, and make everyone's life easier.

Well bat, I am not sure of the NS style of signals (other than they are similar but different than what I'm used to), but if that train was on CSX, a lunar colored aspect most likely would have been displayed (most likely in the medium or slow approach position with the lunar in place of the yellow light, but the rule book has other configurations) indicating an occupied block permitting a movement at restricted speed! That means to enter that track or block under restricted speed which will permit stopping the movement in one half the range of vision, and the speed shall not to exceed 15mph at anytime until a better signal is recieved! There is no implication of clearance or anything, but to enter the block governed by that signal under control of restricted speed looking out for track conditions ahead! If a train is occupying that track, in some locations the signal system is designed to allow trains to enter the block under these rules (sorta similar to the restricted proceed rules at intermediate signals on CSX) which the dispatcher can line a train into that block. But the train will get nothing better than a restricting signal unless the other train is right there at that end of the track or block, then the signal is red. In that case nobody moves without permission from the dispatcher or a better signal. You're right, there is no such thing as a restricting clear or a restricting approach (at least on CSX). I hope I wasn't implying that, but there is a rule for signals displaying restricting aspects which is rule #1290 in the "CSX Signal Aspects and Indications Rules." I'll edit that other posting as I missed my little screw up by leaving out a little tidbit regarding the word "yellow" during editing yesterday.

Boy you couldn't have said this any better.... a consolidated rule book, one set of signals would be absolutely beautiful!!!! But I don't see that happening anytime soon. :blink:

OBS gone freight...

 

[Amtrak OBS Gone Freight]

However, the meaning of a yellow light to the driver of an automobile doesn't really seem to change much from one part of the country to another, whereas the mix of railroad signals in different places having different meanings and fatigue could certainly lead to mistakes. Are there any railroads on which red over yellow does permit 40mph?

Well bat51 gave you good examples of CSX's signals which are known to us as "speed signals." In other words they go hand in hand with our speed rules and the definitions that apply to each. As he pointed out on CSX, a solid red over a flashing yellow means "limited approach." That means my train is restricted to 45 mph through any turnouts, crossovers, sidings, and over power operated switches; then proceed, prepared to stop at the next signal. I can also recieve a flashing green under a solid yellow light, which means my train can proceed, approaching next signal not exceeding "limited speed."

I personally would really like it (even though I don't venture onto other carriers trackage much other than an occasional trip to NS's yard for a transfer run) if there was one set of rules and signals for all railroads. A lot of potential confusion would be eliminated especially for a lot of these Amtrak guys who operate over several carriers on their tour of duty. Now changing the entire rail system so it could be reflect that would be VERY expensive!!!

OBS gone freight....

 

[Dutchrailnut]

In 1983 the USA was nearly down to 2 rulebooks, NORAC for East and GCOR for West.

A few rairoads decided at last minute not to adopt the NORAC rules, namely Metro North, LIRR, NS, CSX.

Why just because they did not like rules that did not apply to their railroads.

Currently there the railroads are so split up that a unification is never gone happen.

specialy with NS and CSX insisting that former Conrail territories drop NORAC in favor of their rules.

To get unified signal rules first a common rule book is needed, then a agreement to only puchase certain kind of signal heads to standardize the signals, then slowly the new signals could be implemented, how long, decades befor they would all be same.

 

[wayman]

To get unified signal rules first a common rule book is needed, then a agreement to only puchase certain kind of signal heads to standardize the signals, then slowly the new signals could be implemented, how long, decades befor they would all be same.

There are even stretches of BNSF in New Mexico or Colorado (along the SWC) where semaphores are still actively in use. (I've heard there are a few in California as well.) Those are how old?! They're very pretty to see as a railfan, but it's just one more completely different set of signals for engineers and conductors to memorize.

I imagine that the freight railroads have extremely little incentive to agree upon a single rulebook and signal standard. If they were to agree on one, some RRs would have little to no infrastructure to change and no retraining necessary, while other RRs would have to spend millions on infrastructure and send their crews through substantial retraining (especially confusing during the many-year changeover period). Perhaps the government/FRA could mandate some sort of "revenue sharing" (a la the Yankees paying the Devil Rays each year to theoretically allow the Devil Rays to pay players more), but that gets extremely complicated and often fails to create a balanced playing field (as any baseball fan has noticed).

Amtrak is the chief beneficiary of a single rulebook and standard signals, since their crews probably run on multiple rulebooks and signals far, far more than the crews of any freight RR. (Well, and obviously the general public is a chief beneficiary in turn, given that we're all passengers whose safety would be greatly improved.) Can Amtrak persuade the freight RRs to do this on its own? The odds of that are right up there with the Devil Rays winning the pennant next year. If the NTSB and FRA pressure the freight RRs, perhaps with Amtrak's encouragement, something might come of it, but I expect the freight RRs would fight tooth and nail against it out of their own economic self-interests (and could exert influence on Congress to side with the RRs).

(Why hasn't BNSF replaced those old semaphores? I'm guessing it's because they're on the Raton Pass line, which BNSF barely uses for freight nowadays. And why would BNSF put the money into upgrading them primarily for Amtrak's benefit?...)

It's an extremely thorny problem.

 

[MrFSS]

Anyone know if all the different national railroads in Europe have a single set of rules? Or, does each railroad do its own thing as apparently is done here in the US?

 

[George Harris]

Anyone know if all the different national railroads in Europe have a single set of rules? Or, does each railroad do its own thing as apparently is done here in the US?

From what I have heard, the situation there makes the US differences look kindergarden simple. You also have language differences to deal with. For example, the crews that run the trains through the English Channel tunnel have to be able to function in both French and English. In general, thought their train crews are much more tightly controlled by their dispatching centers than is common in the US. The simple difference that they call them "drivers" and we call ours "engineers" has a lot more to it that simple words. There have been recent attempts in Europe to develop some consistency, but am not sure how well it is working.

 

[Neil_M]

From what I have heard, the situation there makes the US differences look kindergarden simple. You also have language differences to deal with. For example, the crews that run the trains through the English Channel tunnel have to be able to function in both French and English. In general, thought their train crews are much more tightly controlled by their dispatching centers than is common in the US. The simple difference that they call them "drivers" and we call ours "engineers" has a lot more to it that simple words. There have been recent attempts in Europe to develop some consistency, but am not sure how well it is working.

You only have 1 rulebook per country per national railway, with the increase in 'open access' especially for freight it just wouldnt work for each company to have its own rulebook. In the UK there are lots of train operating companies, but Network Rail who are in charge of the track and signals issue 1 rulebook. Obviously each company has its own instructions for rolling stock and working procedures but everyone toes the same line for signals etc.

As for you Channel Tunnel comment, why is that so complicated? We speak English here and they speak French in France, how else would make it work?! Those drivers who work the Eurostars do have a lot to learn though, Uk, Channel Tunnel, SNCF and SNCB rulebooks to learn, plus 2 (or 3) languages.They are well paid though....

 

[Guest_rdj92807_*]

I cannot comprehend how this recent accident on Amtrak could occur. We have sophisticated mobile GPS devices in our cars. planes, boats and laptops....which make the current train signal system seems totally antiquated.....a joke.

Why doesn't the front and end of every passenger and freight train in the USA have a GPS locator on it, and all engines have LED screens showing EXACTLY where every train is, all the time. The screens could show speed, direction, etc.

Anybody with our current technology could develop and implement such awareness systems in less than a year.

There in no excuse for these accidents to happen. Period.

 

[George Harris]

Now irrelevant - deleted

 

[Amtrak OBS Gone Freight]

I cannot comprehend how this recent accident on Amtrak could occur. We have sophisticated mobile GPS devices in our cars. planes, boats and laptops....which make the current train signal system seems totally antiquated.....a joke.
Why doesn't the front and end of every passenger and freight train in the USA have a GPS locator on it, and all engines have LED screens showing EXACTLY where every train is, all the time. The screens could show speed, direction, etc.

Anybody with our current technology could develop and implement such awareness systems in less than a year.

There in no excuse for these accidents to happen. Period.

Well I hate to burst your bubble, but as long as humans are involved in anything there will be that element of "human error" to deal with in any industry let alone the transportation industry! You also have to remember the fact "humans" design this technology, and that very technology can fall victim to "errors" as well! This kind of technology exists today and is in place in many transit systems, and if it wasn't there, then the rate of incidents would be even higher than they are now. Incidents will continue to happen till the end of time in some way shape and form at some rate, and there is nothing that can be done about it to completely erradicate (spelling) them.

OBS gone freight...

 

[George Harris]

Mr Neil M, you are missing the point. We have been discussing the issues that occur when you operate over the tracks of more than one railroad, which also continues to effectively happen in the cases where even though now under one corporate shell, they have multiple coroprate antecedents. Therefore, what I am trying to say is, that if you have interline running over the tracks of more than one national system in Europe, the situation is much more complex than it is in running over more than one company in the US. Part of this is related to the one railroad per one country system that prevails in Europe so that interline running is a rarity.

What we have in the US is exactly what you have with the "open access" concept in Europe: The owner of the railroad tracks and right of way sets the rules and rulebooks and the operator of the trains whoever they may be must then follow it. Under no circumstances can the owner of a train say to the owner of the track, I want to run my train over your track and use my rulebook, not your rulebook. Well, maybe they could for certain things like train make-up, but when it comes to speed limits, signals, etc., the owner of the track calls the shots and always has.

Simple example, of many:

In days past, the C&O trains out of Washington DC ran under five differnent rule books between Washington DC and Charlottesville, VA, all with the one C&O crew, engine, and set of equipment:

1. Washington Terminal Company - Washingotn Union Station to Virginia Tower

2. Pennsylvania Railroad - Virginia Tower to the south end of the Patomac River Bridge

3. RF&P RR - South end of bridge to AF Tower (south of Alexandria VA station)

4. Southern Railway - AF Tower to Orange VA

5. C&O Orange Va to Charlottesville VA and onward - finally onto home rails.

even with the mergers, you are still dealing with three railroads:

1. Amtrak - former Washington Terminal Company property

2. CSX - Virginia Tower to AF Tower

3. NS - AF tower to Orange

4. CSX - the rest of the way.

So, you can end up with a suitcase full of rulebooks that you have to know.

 

[George Harris]

I cannot comprehend how this recent accident on Amtrak could occur. We have sophisticated mobile GPS devices in our cars. planes, boats and laptops....which make the current train signal system seems totally antiquated.....a joke.
Why doesn't the front and end of every passenger and freight train in the USA have a GPS locator on it, and all engines have LED screens showing EXACTLY where every train is, all the time. The screens could show speed, direction, etc.

Anybody with our current technology could develop and implement such awareness systems in less than a year.

There in no excuse for these accidents to happen. Period.

Well I hate to burst your bubble, but as long as humans are involved in anything there will be that element of "human error" to deal with in any industry let alone the transportation industry! You also have to remember the fact "humans" design this technology, and that very technology can fall victim to "errors" as well! This kind of technology exists today and is in place in many transit systems, and if it wasn't there, then the rate of incidents would be even higher than they are now. Incidents will continue to happen till the end of time in some way shape and form at some rate, and there is nothing that can be done about it to completely erradicate (spelling) them.

OBS gone freight...

Very true, OBS.

Everything looks simple to the uninvolved.

 

[Amtrak OBS Gone Freight]

So, you can end up with a suitcase full of rulebooks that you have to know.

Yep, and I have enough darned rule books in the grip for just the one road I operate over!!! :lol:

OBS gone freight...

 

[Chris J.]

I cannot comprehend how this recent accident on Amtrak could occur. We have sophisticated mobile GPS devices in our cars. planes, boats and laptops....which make the current train signal system seems totally antiquated.....a joke.
Why doesn't the front and end of every passenger and freight train in the USA have a GPS locator on it, and all engines have LED screens showing EXACTLY where every train is, all the time. The screens could show speed, direction, etc.

Anybody with our current technology could develop and implement such awareness systems in less than a year.

There in no excuse for these accidents to happen. Period.

Would GPS be accurate enough to place a train on a given track. Wikipedia suggests a civilian GPS is accurate to around 50 feet, so I don't think you could use it to tell which track a train was on where there are multiple tracks, which was the case in this accident. I suspect in an area of 4 tracks, all 4 would fit withing the 50 ft accuracy of a GPS, so I don't think it would help here.

You'd also need a way to get this information to all the other trains somehow.

If the signal was set correctly (I think it was), would cab signalling have helped? If the train system knows it's signal was for 15mph, i'd expect some sort of alarm to go off if it went over that.