amtrak-csx-trains-collide-in-south-carolina-injuries-reported

[Chris333]

An article I just printed in the paper (probably from the AP) said this could have been prevented with PTC. 

[peteski]

An article I just printed in the paper (probably from the AP) said this could have been prevented with PTC. 

Isn't is amazing just how uninformed reporters are?  And nobody bothers to do any fact checking or get a clue as to how the technology works?  I also saw a reported saying that the CSX trains was on "unloading track".  Is that what we now call sidings?  Whatever happened with reporters reaching out to subject matter experts to do some fact-checking of their stories?  Nobody bothers anymore. This country is really dumbing down (and nobody cares).  Dumb population is easy to manipulate.  I don't want to deal  with reality anymore. I think I'm going to lock myself in my workshop and fix some models which have wire grabs that stick out too far. 

Another thing:  if one of the trains was stationary, can this still be called a head-on collision?  Why not describe it as one train simply running into the other one?  But that wouldn't sound as exciting. 

[Chris333]

https://apnews.com/7478c3e4083e47ca905f8ca46fc5dc20

Sumwalt said that positive train control — a GPS-based safety system that can automatically slow or stop trains — could have prevented the accident.

“That’s what it’s designed to do,” he said, referring to technology that regulators have been pressing for for decades with mixed success.

And that is from the chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board.

Even with PTC there would have been a collision, the turnout is just a short distance from the parked train. Nothing will stop a train that fast.

[nuno81291]

 Reading on an industry forum someone pointed out that if the switch was routed to the siding (which was occupied of course) the Amtrak would have hit a restricted speed well before the turnout (600 feet or so to the lead unit of csx). I don’t claim to be an expert or cannot articulate his point but in my mind this isn’t putting a man on the moon. These sort of incidents are entirely preventable. Supposedly CSX working on the down signal should have itself notified the train. This reminds me of the Bad Abling commuter crash in 2006 where a dispatcher was found to be on their phone and misrouted a train into another while their equivalent to ptc was down. Human error. Tragic but preventable.

Of course if the signal system being down also meant PTC would have been down then I have a hard time to wrap my head around following a MAS of 59.. when our auto traffic lights go down do we just fly through intersections at 60? I think not.. how they allow someone to do this holding the lives of hundreds in their hands has no excuse. RIP to the crew but this certainly leaves an unsettling feeling about rail travel in the US.

[learmoia]

And amtrak likely was NOT running at restricted speed, stop within half the range of vision of trains,  locomotives,  men,  or equipment on the track.

If the signal system is malfunctioning and all signals are set to there most restrictive aspect, no train has the authority to move at any speed other than restricted.

Amtrak most likely didn't follow instructions.

Drasko

True...

Out of curiosity, how would PTC have handled this situation..

~Ian

[jpwisc]

Human error, ouch. It sounds like someone forgot to line and lock all switches in the normal position before they went home for the day.

[Maletrain]

Is that particular switch manually thrown at its location, or remotely thrown by a dispatcher somewhere else (like FLorida)? 

But, either way, since it is a mainline switch, shouldn't its alignment have had some visual effect on a control panel and signal system somewhere, telling folks that it is set for the siding?  The train was doing its local mainline speed limit of ~50 mph, and I would think that taking a siding would have had a speed reduction associated with that and some sort of visual indication for an approaching engineer.

[Scottl]

Human error, ouch. It sounds like someone forgot to line and lock all switches in the normal position before they went home for the day.

What is meant by "locked"?  I understand the lining, which I take to mean positioning the points.  Do they physically lock the switch in position?

[ridinshotgun]

What is meant by "locked"?  I understand the lining, which I take to mean positioning the points.  Do they physically lock the switch in position?

Yes.  Padlocked in position.  If you watch the briefing it is covered in there in the questions section.

[draskouasshat]

If the signal system is turned off, not just malfunctioning, or set to "stop", the railroad could declare it "dark territory", under timetable/track warrant control.  It used to be that, in the absence of a signal system, trains were limited to 49 mph.

Here is the actual site, on Google Maps.  There is even a string of autoracks on the siding, where the CSX train was today.  The switch in question is to the upper right of the highway bridge. 
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.9086261,-81.0672532,354m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en

It is not that easy. That is not how this works. You don't just turn a signal system off and apply dark territory.
It takes bulletins, rule changes, and a crap ton of communication and politics to change a signaled territory to dark. You also have to go turn every signal head on the sub to the side.
Also, you can't just darken a section of the signal system either as that would require to rewire the signal system for distant signals.
It's not simple nakalanga. Its not simple at all.

Drasko

[draskouasshat]

https://apnews.com/7478c3e4083e47ca905f8ca46fc5dc20
And that is from the chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board.

Even with PTC there would have been a collision, the turnout is just a short distance from the parked train. Nothing will stop a train that fast.

If someone threw the switch directly in front of the train, no. If ptc was enabled and the signal system was working as intended,  PTC WOULD HAVE STOPPED THE TRAIN!

trust me, i know a bit about pts.........

[draskouasshat]

True...

Out of curiosity, how would PTC have handled this situation..

~Ian

It depends on the railroad. PTC depends on the signal system. The signal department owns it and other departments tie into it. If the signal system is down because of something like finding a ground, signals would have either been darkened or set to the most restrictive aspect. Trains would have to be talked by the signals and move at restricted speed.

[Scottl]

Thanks.  Can't watch the video now.

[draskouasshat]

So there was no light signal visible to be seen by an Amtrak train coming around the bend in time to stop ? A couple of grand is all it would have cost for a crude one . It should have been a NTSB mandated item wherever Passenger service runs decades ago .

No light signal?  What are you talking about?

[wcfn100]

If ptc was enabled and the signal system was working as intended, 

If the signals in place were working as intended, wouldn't they have stopped the train?

Jason