• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

AMTRAK Train derailed in Philidelphia USA

Status
Not open for further replies.

notadriver

Established Member
Joined
1 Oct 2010
Messages
3,653
Why can't the unions do anything to stop the installation of cameras ? If they tried it here in the UK they would definitely fail.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

me123

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2007
Messages
8,510
Planes don't have inwards facing cameras. Why should trains ?

Well, I'm just pleasantly surprised that the solution doesn't somehow involve guns. But inward facing cameras is just strange. I'm not in the rail industry, but I do not really understand exactly what these are going to achieve. This just seems like a reactionary response to say "hey, look, we're doing something".

I'll join others by looking at the airline industry for comparison. I need not list off some of the horrific incidents that have happened on board aircraft. But I will cite the most recent: the case of Germanwings flight 9525 in which the co-pilot for reasons unknown to anyone other than himself appears to have deliberately crashed the aircraft. We have gathered a huge amount of data about this flight from the "black box" that has helped us ascertain what happened (past tense, of course). Even after this tragic event (not to mention other horrendous incidents such as 9/11), I have not once have I heard anyone suggest that a cockpit should be monitored by a camera.

Of course, similar technology in trains would not necessarily prevent a fatal crash. It could help demonstrate cause of a crash after it had happened, which would be useful.

So, would inward facing cameras help? I cannot see any reason why they would. It is impractical to constantly monitor the camera (assuming that's the intention): it would need a dedicated uninterrupted wireless internet connection that can't be 100% relied upon over the substantial geography of the United States, and as has already been said the job of watching multiple feeds of a person driving a train would be soul destroying. Just what are they going to see that they could stop? A driver doing the YMCA? I can't imagine that there's any behaviour that would realistically happen that would be considered "suspicious" enough to intervene. If you're going to deliberately derail a train at speed, you just push the accelerator forward (apologies, I suspect this isn't the correct term).

It's not a video of the driver you need to monitor here. It's what the driver's doing with the train, and if you don't need a camera to monitor that.
 

philabos

Member
Joined
19 May 2010
Messages
180
Location
Lancaster PA
Why can't the unions do anything to stop the installation of cameras ? If they tried it here in the UK they would definitely fail.

The political pressure is just too great.
The NTSB wants these cameras for forensic purposes in the future. The fact that the engineer remembers nothing from North Philadelphia to the site of the derailment makes their case fairly strong.
 

notadriver

Established Member
Joined
1 Oct 2010
Messages
3,653
The political pressure is just too great.

The NTSB wants these cameras for forensic purposes in the future. The fact that the engineer remembers nothing from North Philadelphia to the site of the derailment makes their case fairly strong.



I think proper overspeed protection for sharp curves is the answer and not cameras. Cameras wont prevent a reoccurance. There is no way such an incident could have happened in the UK as all curves on the main line have overspeed protection devices.
 
Last edited:

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,793
Location
Nottingham
I think have proper overspeed protection for sharp curves is the answer and not cameras. Cameras wont prevent a reoccurance. There is no way such an incident could have happened in the UK as all curves on the main line have overspeed protection devices.

Really?

TPWS is installed at the more severe speed restrictions but it would be possible to defeat it by passing the loops below the trapping speed and then applying power to accelerate. The same applies with approach controlled signals, depending on their position relative to the junctions they protect. Especially if, as with this accident, it was a powerful electric locomotive hauling a relatively short train.

We had an accident at Bletchley a few years back when a driver of a class 90 light engine was slowing correctly at a red signal which then cleared under approach control for a low-speed crossover. The driver applied full power and derailed on the crossover because the loco had accelerated to well over the safe turnout speed.
 

notadriver

Established Member
Joined
1 Oct 2010
Messages
3,653
Yes really. It would prevent an ACCIDENTAL overspeed approaching curves.
 

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
27,534
Location
Redcar
Do we know if the accident in question on this thread was due to accidental overspeed or not? Perhaps if there was a camera it might be easier to ascertain this? *runs very quickly and hides in a very deep and strong bunker* ;)
 

notadriver

Established Member
Joined
1 Oct 2010
Messages
3,653
Has the driver said he deliberately tried to crash his train ? If he didn't then it's accidental.
 

philabos

Member
Joined
19 May 2010
Messages
180
Location
Lancaster PA
[/B]
Don't know one way or the other I think?

Correct.
Since the driver remembers nothing all possibilities are still open with regard to him.
What is not open at this point is track, signal, or mechanical failure.
All have been ruled out.
The NTSB has not been able to rule out, or suggest, cell phone use. Apparently having difficulty with cell phone time stamps. More to follow on that issue when they make a determination.
 
Last edited:

A-driver

Established Member
Joined
9 May 2011
Messages
4,482
I'm not sure how a camera would show of something was accidental or not...all it would show is a driver applying power. But you can see that on the trains data recorder. All a camera would do is further muddy the water by increasing speculation via body language etc but still prove very little. It would only really help prove the driver was doing something wrong like using a mobile or reading a paper etc.

If the driver honestly dosnt remember anything leading up to the crash then, in the UK anyway, they would most likely be removed from driving ok health grounds as it would be believed he suffered some sort of black out. Has happened to drivers over here when they say you can't remember anything about an incident.
 

ac6000cw

Established Member
Joined
10 May 2014
Messages
3,119
Location
Cambridge, UK
The problem with this quote is that it completely ignores the fact that incidents and investigations are actually the main method by which rail transport gets safer.

If in-cab cameras can help a post-incident investigation pick up a problem which might otherwise have gone undetected (remember, major investigations always have more than one recommendation coming out of them) or even lead to a problem getting detected before it results in a major incident, they will help those safety improvements come earlier and easier.

I can understand the point about camera footage assisting post-accident investigation, but in reality all that would tell us is what we already know - humans fall asleep, get distracted, lose concentration, get confused, do stupid things sometimes.

That is why railways have developed machines to deal with the consequences of those human failings - automatic train stops, overspeed controls, alerters, signal interlocking etc. on the basis that you can't stop people behaving as humans occasionally, so it's much better to stop it becoming a serious accident by having a machine intervene.

If you have money to spend on improving safety (Amtrak doesn't have much to spare, and it's 20,000 USD per locomotive to install the cameras), surely it's better to spend it on things like better/more comprehensive speed enforcement systems ?
 

MarkyT

Established Member
Joined
20 May 2012
Messages
6,232
Location
Torbay
If you have money to spend on improving safety (Amtrak doesn't have much to spare, and it's 20,000 USD per locomotive to install the cameras), surely it's better to spend it on things like better/more comprehensive speed enforcement systems ?

Seems an awful lot of money for a simple camera, but that's probably average or worst case where the older units don't have a preexisting video system with forward view cameras and streaming or recording functions on board, and the figure might include a share of the initial cost of setting up a central monitoring facility as well. Just adding an additional camera to a modern loco such as the one involved at Philadelphia SHOULD be cheaper. However I agree fully that any money available would be much better spent on technical measures to prevent incidents in the first place, rather than means to allocate blame afterward.
 

ac6000cw

Established Member
Joined
10 May 2014
Messages
3,119
Location
Cambridge, UK
From http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/27/n...ras-to-monitor-locomotive-engineers.html?_r=0

Mr. Boardman said installation would cost about $20,000 for each locomotive, or about $1.4 million for all those that Amtrak plans to equip by the end of the year.

Mr. Boardman is Amtrak president, and it's the 70 modern ACS-64 electrics he's talking about, which apparently already have some provision for the cameras. I've seen figures of around $6 - $7 million for the whole Amtrak fleet, which presumably includes all the 300-odd older diesels (which are single-cab, whereas the electrics are double-cab).
 
Last edited:

MarkyT

Established Member
Joined
20 May 2012
Messages
6,232
Location
Torbay
. . . it's the 70 modern ACS-64 electrics he's talking about, which apparently already have some provision for the cameras.

Ok fair enough, project management, procurement rounds, design, 'consultation', ergonomics analysis, time out of traffic, etc etc. I can see how it might add up really plus you've got to set up a system either for monitoring all those live feeds or reviewing the recordings probably with some dedicated staff. Things do tend to cost a fair amount in railway projects, no doubt in the US just as in the UK.
 

A-driver

Established Member
Joined
9 May 2011
Messages
4,482
Phone or no phone; that driver went too fast through the curve!


Um, yes. Well done for stating he obvious. The real issue is why. Blaming the driver is of no use. Finding out why it happened so future incidents can be prevented is what is important. And it may turn out that it wasn't simply driver error.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top