Wolverine derails (10/21)

[creddick]

Eastbound Wolverine derails near Niles, MI. Story here.

www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2012/10/dozen_passengers_injured_by_de.html#incart_river_default

 

[Agent]

Amtrak #350, the Wolverine, derailed Sunday morning near Niles, Michigan. At least eight were taken to a hospital.

Here's a link with photo gallery: http://www.southbend...0,5949743.story.

 

[TrainLoverJoy]

Amtrak #350, the Wolverine, derailed Sunday morning near Niles, Michigan. At least eight were taken to a hospital.

Here's a link with photo gallery: http://www.southbend...0,5949743.story.

This Wolverine sometimes makes stops at Niles, and sometimes it goes straight through. This one had made a stop at Niles so it probably wasn't going very fast. (I've used my GPS when on that train and have reached speeds of 118mph at times along the route....luckily it wasn't going fast when it derailed.)

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

Amtrak #350, the Wolverine, derailed Sunday morning near Niles, Michigan. At least eight were taken to a hospital.

Here's a link with photo gallery: http://www.southbend...0,5949743.story.

This Wolverine sometimes makes stops at Niles, and sometimes it goes straight through. This one had made a stop at Niles so it probably wasn't going very fast. (I've used my GPS when on that train and have reached speeds of 118mph at times along the route....luckily it wasn't going fast when it derailed.)

Theere must have been a mistake. A P42DC cannot go 118 mph.

 

[TrainLoverJoy]

Amtrak #350, the Wolverine, derailed Sunday morning near Niles, Michigan. At least eight were taken to a hospital.

Here's a link with photo gallery: http://www.southbend...0,5949743.story.

This Wolverine sometimes makes stops at Niles, and sometimes it goes straight through. This one had made a stop at Niles so it probably wasn't going very fast. (I've used my GPS when on that train and have reached speeds of 118mph at times along the route....luckily it wasn't going fast when it derailed.)

Theere must have been a mistake. A P42DC cannot go 118 mph.

Hmmm......I thought that was going pretty fast....it didn't maintain that speed for very long. I guess my GPS is off.

 

[SarahZ]

Amtrak.com posted an alert at 1:00 PM, offering bustitutions, refunds, modifications, and vouchers to anyone affected by the delays.

The inbound (due @ 4:08) Wolverine is about two hours behind, according to Amtrak.com. The Blue Water, which leaves Chicago at 4:00, hasn't departed yet. The 6:00 Wolverine from Chicago has a notice stating, "Information Unavailable: Sorry, due to a service disruption, we are unable to provide estimated departure and arrival times." The same message has been posted for the 2:25 and 9:26 Wolverines from Kalamazoo to Chicago.

What's strange is, I heard an inbound train (from Chicago) go by a couple hours ago.

It was definitely Amtrak, as we live just a few houses from the tracks. I thought it was the 4:08 Wolverine. Maybe Amtrak.com hasn't been updated yet?

 

[jis]

NTSB is now involved in the investigation. It would be interesting to see the outcome. On the face of it this is pretty scary. In an ITCS controlled section a switch wrongly set to the yard does not cause ITCS to slow the train down to a safe speed for the route set. On the face of it does not sound good. Possible that very significant rules violations of some sort were involved somewhere. The question is where, and also, did the ITCS equipment operate as expected, or was there a failure of some sort there? Was it even operative at the time?

So the wait for the results of the investigation begins.

 

[Trogdor]

Amtrak.com posted an alert at 1:00 PM, offering bustitutions, refunds, modifications, and vouchers to anyone affected by the delays.

The inbound (due @ 4:08) Wolverine is about two hours behind, according to Amtrak.com. The Blue Water, which leaves Chicago at 4:00, hasn't departed yet. The 6:00 Wolverine from Chicago has a notice stating, "Information Unavailable: Sorry, due to a service disruption, we are unable to provide estimated departure and arrival times." The same message has been posted for the 2:25 and 9:26 Wolverines from Kalamazoo to Chicago.

What's strange is, I heard an inbound train (from Chicago) go by a couple hours ago.

It was definitely Amtrak, as we live just a few houses from the tracks. I thought it was the 4:08 Wolverine. Maybe Amtrak.com hasn't been updated yet?

351 and 365's equipment were stuck east of the derailment, and repositioned back to Pontiac. That's probably what you heard.

 

[SarahZ]

Ah, it makes sense now. Thanks!

 

[PRR 60]

... On the face of it this is pretty scary. ...

VERY scary!

 

[George Harris]

News reports long on armwaving and short on facts.

From the look of the pictures, speed was realtively low. Likewise, number and severity of injuries indicates low speed. Flying baggage, what and where? I would guess probably 25 mph 15 mph or less. It appears that the train was in a yard track rather than a normal passing track.

Freight cars look to be on a parallel track, not the one the train was on, so at worst a danger of sideswipe.

While there were freight cars on parallel tracks, a look at some of the other pictures shows the engine to be about 30 to 40 feet short of a car on the same track. It looks like a switch was set wrong so that the train was diverted into this track.

Six months to a year is the normal between event and NTSB report. It has nothing to do with the complexity of the situation.

 

[jis]

News reports long on armwaving and short on facts.

From the look of the pictures, speed was realtively low. Likewise, number and severity of injuries indicates low speed. Flying baggage, what and where? I would guess probably 25 mph or less.

Freight cars look to be on a parallel track, not the one the train was on, so at worst a danger of sideswipe.

Six months to a year is the normal between event and NTSB report. It has nothing to do with the complexity of the situation.

25mph or less is my guess too, which could be suggesting that ITCS worked and kept speed limited. That would be the best outcome from the investigation. Though I would imagine that there will be some red faces about switching a potentially higher speed train into yard trackage by mistake, if that is what happened.

 

[SarahZ]

I would guess a lot of the "flying baggage" was actually pillows and duffels that get stacked on top of suitcases and laptops and such sliding off of tray tables.

 

[Trogdor]

I would guess a lot of the "flying baggage" was actually pillows and duffels that get stacked on top of suitcases and laptops and such sliding off of tray tables.

Could be, but I've seen stuff like that happen over rough switches even when the train doesn't derail.

 

[SarahZ]

I would guess a lot of the "flying baggage" was actually pillows and duffels that get stacked on top of suitcases and laptops and such sliding off of tray tables.

Could be, but I've seen stuff like that happen over rough switches even when the train doesn't derail.

Good point. That's a big reason I don't let go of my drink even when it's sitting on the tray table. ^_^

 

[johnny.menhennet]

I would guess a lot of the "flying baggage" was actually pillows and duffels that get stacked on top of suitcases and laptops and such sliding off of tray tables.

Could be, but I've seen stuff like that happen over rough switches even when the train doesn't derail.

Good point. That's a big reason I don't let go of my drink even when it's sitting on the tray table. ^_^

Oh I agree. While I do not always hold on, something that frustrates me greatly is when the seat in front of me is reclined and I have food on the tray table. When they decide to raise it, they have the entire thing JERK up and often spills my drink, rather than controlling the seat even a little bit.

 

[George Harris]

A search on the subject got me to several sources. Interestingly, some of the pictures could be found on more than one. A couple with several pictures:

http://www.wsbt.com/news/wsbt-breaking-news-train-derailment-in-niles-20121021,0,1369365.story Go to the picture gallery

http://www.clickondetroit.com/news/About-a-dozen-hurt-in-Michigan-train-derailment/-/1719418/17075376/-/vj8jq6z/-/index.html one picture on someone's cell phone looking along the side of the train opposite all the others

http://www.southbendtribune.com/about/onlineextras/multimedia/sbt-photos-amtrak-derailment-20121021,0,1459660.photogallery some of the better ones.

A few comments:

Based on a couple of the WSBT pictures: Yes the train was diverted into an occupied track.

Based on several of the others: It appears that the train was already on a yard track. A track that appears to be the main appears well off to the left in the cell phone picture. If it was in a yard track, then the speed was probably 15 mph or less. The amount of digging into the ballast and such would be reasonable to expect at that speed.

 

[jis]

Paraphrasing from Gene Poon as posted on trainorders....

So far what is known from the investigation:

o 350 had a clear signal at CP190, but the switch at CP190 was set in reverse towards the yard lead. Some one was working in the control hut at the time of the accident, but apparently did not have track possession.

o Train hit the switch at 60mmph and went towards the yard throwing the engineer to the floor. He recovered and put the train into emergency.

o Train struck derail in the yard lead and derailed.

o It stopped 20' from a string of freight cars, short of colliding into them.

o "Questionable use of the safety appliances on the engine, including the ITCS system required for 110mph operation, was found. A brief comment from a source: "There was no safety net. It was all bypassed." This presumably applies to both the condition on the engine and the erroneous signal indication. "

My comment: If all this is true, NTSB investigation is going to be pretty unpleasant for Amtrak and a few heads will roll somewhere.

At the risk of sounding somewhat shrill, it appears to me that if all this is true, there is very serious systemic problem on that line and speed limits need to be lowered to pre-ITCS levels or lower until problem is fixed. Just IMHO. What good is a fancy protection system if trains are going to run around with the whole shebang disabled, and even basic stuff like signal interlock with switch disabled?

Again we await NTSB report with baited breath. But in addition start wondering what exactly is Amtrak doing with basic governance problems involving safety on this line?

 

[George Harris]

Go to http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-ntsb-chicagomichigan-amtrak-missed-hitting-freight-car-by-21-feet-20121023,0,2208814.story

And you will see some of the same information JIS quoted. Here are some highlights from the article:

Accelerating from stop at Niles.

Moving at 60 mph when hit the misaligned switch. (No mention of signal indication.)

Engineer thrown to floor, but managed to then put brake to emergency.

Misaligned switch put train into yard track. It ran over a derail but did not derail. (Derails in such locations are normally positioned to derail equipment coming out of the yard, not going into it.)

Train derailed about 290 feet beyond switch. (That probably put it just beyond the derail.)

There is more information of interest, but it seems advisible to quit here to avoid copyright issues.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

Go to http://www.chicagotr...0,2208814.story

And you will see some of the same information JIS quoted. Here are some highlights from the article:

Accelerating from stop at Niles.

Moving at 60 mph when hit the misaligned switch. (No mention of signal indication.)

Engineer thrown to floor, but managed to then put brake to emergency.

Misaligned switch put train into yard track. It ran over a derail but did not derail. (Derails in such locations are normally positioned to derail equipment coming out of the yard, not going into it.)

Train derailed about 290 feet beyond switch. (That probably put it just beyond the derail.)

There is more information of interest, but it seems advisible to quit here to avoid copyright issues.

Why did the train derail if it did not derail at the derailer.

 

[The Davy Crockett]

Go to http://www.chicagotr...0,2208814.story

And you will see some of the same information JIS quoted. Here are some highlights from the article:

Accelerating from stop at Niles.

Moving at 60 mph when hit the misaligned switch. (No mention of signal indication.)

Engineer thrown to floor, but managed to then put brake to emergency.

Misaligned switch put train into yard track. It ran over a derail but did not derail. (Derails in such locations are normally positioned to derail equipment coming out of the yard, not going into it.)

Train derailed about 290 feet beyond switch. (That probably put it just beyond the derail.)

There is more information of interest, but it seems advisible to quit here to avoid copyright issues.

Why did the train derail if it did not derail at the derailer.

Because yard track, which is not designed for 60 mph, combined with emergency braking, should do it.