Train derails on highway bridge in Washington state

[ac6000cw]

So basically there was nothing to prevent it as in the Croydon crash.

Correct (and Morpeth - more than once - is probably the best UK accident comparison), assuming this is a simple 'driver over-speed' accident cause.

 

[Taunton]

Seemingly, as it was the inaugural service over the route, a fair number of those on board were local rail fans. I hope none of our fellow enthusiasts over there have come to harm.

 

[Dieseldriver]

So sad that Morpeth style incidents seem to happen so regularly over in the States. Really, these incidents shouldn't be so frequent in this day and age.
Having said that, as a Driver on UK railways, I can think of a few locations that aren't protected as well as they should be by TPWS to mitigate against such an incident.
My thoughts are with everyone involved in this tragic incident.

 

[LeeLivery]

This is the 2nd derailment of the Cascades this year and the 4th US crash caused by overspeeding in 2 years (This one, Philadelphia,
Hoboken, Brooklyn). They really need to spend on their infrastructure. Probably the only thing I agree with Trump on.

 

[GodAtum]

A miracle only 3 people killed

 

[Alfie1014]

A miracle only 3 people killed

Agreed when you look at the damage done to the train, some simalarities to the Pendo at Grayrigg where the structure of the vehicles protected many.

 

[MarlowDonkey]

Was this a new line constructed? If so, why put in a 30 mph curve on a line designed for 80 mph? The TGV and other European lines have demonstrated that for high speed passenger services, you build in straight lines, regardless of gradients.

 

[BRX]

Was this a new line constructed? If so, why put in a 30 mph curve on a line designed for 80 mph? The TGV and other European lines have demonstrated that for high speed passenger services, you build in straight lines, regardless of gradients.

Because it's passing through an urban area. You obviously can't just build in a straight line. Also, "high speed" means something rather different in the states compared to Europe. This is not a high speed line; it's a route some parts of which allow running at 80mph.

 

[NSEFAN]

Was this a new line constructed? If so, why put in a 30 mph curve on a line designed for 80 mph? The TGV and other European lines have demonstrated that for high speed passenger services, you build in straight lines, regardless of gradients.

Is it not a freight-only route that has been upgraded to allow passenger trains? Even then, tight curves may be inevitable to fit alongside buildings or other land. The point is that there's a 30mph curve but the train took it at 80mph. The fact that the driver did this and nothing was in place to stop him is where the failings are.

 

[BRX]

Good lord. This was just 3 weeks ago....
http://komonews.com/news/local/lake...eadly-accidents-from-high-speed-train-service

As I think has already been covered, the accidents he was talking about were of an entirely different nature.

 

[rebmcr]

They really need to spend on their infrastructure. Probably the only thing I agree with Trump on.

Despite his tweet, his funding plans involve further cuts to Amtrak.

 

[Darandio]

Was this a new line constructed? If so, why put in a 30 mph curve on a line designed for 80 mph? The TGV and other European lines have demonstrated that for high speed passenger services, you build in straight lines, regardless of gradients.

As has already been stated above, it's not a new line, it's an upgraded freight line.

 

[Dixie]

Is it not a freight-only route that has been upgraded to allow passenger trains? Even then, tight curves may be inevitable to fit alongside buildings or other land. The point is that there's a 30mph curve but the train took it at 80mph. The fact that the driver did this and nothing was in place to stop him is where the failings are.

Indeed. And I wonder how many pre-inauguration trips each driver had over the route before it opened for passenger service yesterday? I guess there must be places in the UK where an 80 to 30 mph restriction exists though, but obviously with protection?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Was this a new line constructed? If so, why put in a 30 mph curve on a line designed for 80 mph? The TGV and other European lines have demonstrated that for high speed passenger services, you build in straight lines, regardless of gradients.

Railway lines in the US are not "designed for 80mph", this (or rather an artificial 79mph) is the regular speed restriction for passenger trains on freight railroads, without additional safety equipment.
Before the track upgrade (which was no doubt its condition when the I5 bridge was built), the line was a low-grade 25mph freight route.
After the upgrade, 79mph is now probably the line speed further north, with a restriction to 30mph over the bridge and associated curves.
I see it's the same speed over the bridge for all trains so tilt probably doesn't come into the equation here.

 

[edwin_m]

I wonder if the upgrading has included easing this curve. The bridge over the road looks as if it was originally double track with the current single track slewed across it, and the retaining wall looks quite new. However this still does not explain how a train came to be approaching at 80mph.

Rail casualties per passenger-mile are far higher in the States than in most European countries. For most journeys in the UK rail and air are roughly equally safe and much safer than car, but I suspect in the States rail is significantly less safe than air and probably less safe than driving.

 

[MarlowDonkey]

I guess there must be places in the UK where an 80 to 30 mph restriction exists though, but obviously with protection?

According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_accidents_at_Morpeth, Morpeth is the most severe curve on a main line and that has a 50 mph limit. There are presumably sharper curves on Branch lines and at junctions where speeds would or should be limited.

Presumably they require route knowledge in the USA. Similarities to the Croydon tram seem inescapable, a sharp curve on an otherwise unrestricted section and a lack of automatic warnings of the potential hazard ahead.

It does seem this is a rebuild of a previously existing route, rather than a new alignment. Even though the track and ballast look new, the bridge doesn't.

 

[AndyPJG]

I wonder if the upgrading has included easing this curve. The bridge over the road looks as if it was originally double track with the current single track slewed across it, and the retaining wall looks quite new.

Indeed, the Google Maps aerial view does show double track over the (now replaced) bridge.

 

[BRX]

I suspect in the States rail is significantly less safe than air and probably less safe than driving.

That seems very unlikely. 100 people a day killed on the USA's roads. Obviously there are more passenger-kms on roads but even so, they'd have to be doing very badly indeed to manage to make rail even more dangerous than driving.

 

[ac6000cw]

Indeed, the Google Maps aerial view does show double track over the (now replaced) bridge.

It doesn't look like that to me - this is the bridge in question - https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@47.0814324,-122.6762858,353m/data=!3m1!1e3

(Just west of there the double-track BNSF mainline also crosses the same interstate highway on two bridges - the new cutoff route has a junction with it just south of there).

It's possible that the (then low speed freight) line was relocated when the interstate was built, with the bridges built wide to allow for a curved railway - I don't know the history of the line.

 

[AndyPJG]

It doesn't look like that to me - this is the bridge in question - https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@47.0814324,-122.6762858,353m/data=!3m1!1e3

(Just west of there the double-track BNSF mainline also crosses the same interstate highway on two bridges - the new cutoff route has a junction with it just south of there).

It's possible that the (then low speed freight) line was relocated when the interstate was built, with the bridges built wide to allow for a curved railway - I don't know the history of the line.

Odd, the imagery seems to have been updated overnight - the street view image didn't have the graffiti, had there was a lattice work handrail too.

 

[MarkyT]

Looking on Google Earth yesterday it's clear from successive historical images that the single line was relaid and modernised during 2016, with the latest image from summer this year showing new track complete on clean ballast. No appreciable change in track geometry is apparrent however which is why a local 30 mph restriction had to apply while elsewhere on straighter sections, including the approach to the derailment site, the infrastructure refurb allowed a higher speed to be authorised.

 

[philabos]

There is no PTC on that stretch of track, an Amtrak official confirmed.

Subsequent reporting indicates PTC was installed but not yet activated.
It was scheduled for activation in 2018.

 

[b0b]

With it being the inaugural run, surely questions have to be asked whether the driver was under pressure to run as fast as possible to demonstrate the time saving of the new line, and/or the cab wasn't sterile and the driver distracted by others?

 

[mallard]

A US passenger train that derailed, killing three people, was travelling at 80mph (130km/h) on a curve with a speed limit of 30mph, data from the train's rear engine indicates.

The BBC are now reporting that "data from the train's rear engine" indicates that it was travelling at 80mph into the 30mph curve, so overspeed is now all-but confirmed to have been the cause.

The exact circumstances will come out in time. My personal speculation would be that with this being a new route, the driver wasn't fully familiarised with it and/or distraction from additional people in the cab for the first run.

 

[Darandio]

Odd, the imagery seems to have been updated overnight - the street view image didn't have the graffiti, had there was a lattice work handrail too.

You were looking at Google Streetview weren't you? I posted the following yesterday on the first page, it did have the graffiti and the image hasn't changed overnight.

Where your link pinpointed was pretty much correct. This is the bridge: https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@47.0...4!1s3NdbsERlezWk-yDx7gsBgQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

The BBC are now reporting that "data from the train's rear engine" indicates that it was travelling at 80mph into the 30mph curve, so overspeed is now all-but confirmed to have been the cause.
The exact circumstances will come out in time. My personal speculation would be that with this being a new route, the driver wasn't fully familiarised with it and/or distraction from additional people in the cab for the first run.

Which seems to make the circumstances similar in principle to the TGV derailment during tests on the new line near Strasbourg in 2015.
This was when the installed ETCS system was disabled for over-speed tests, leading to late braking for the final curve on the line.
The driver(s) were also distracted by other people in the cab.
The 80mph in the Cascades crash was confirmed by the US safety authority (NTSB), from the rear loco's data recorder.

 

[WatcherZero]

Seemingly, as it was the inaugural service over the route, a fair number of those on board were local rail fans. I hope none of our fellow enthusiasts over there have come to harm.

Sadly at least one fatality confirmed to be.

 

[edwin_m]

That seems very unlikely. 100 people a day killed on the USA's roads. Obviously there are more passenger-kms on roads but even so, they'd have to be doing very badly indeed to manage to make rail even more dangerous than driving.

You appear to be right. According to the first link below there were 12,628 car occupant fatalities and 11 train accident fatalities (excluding grade crossings and trespassers) in 2016. The second link gives 2,984 billion passenger miles by car and 18.275 billion passenger miles by Amtrak and commuter rail. Therefore I think fatalities per billion miles are 4.23 by car and 0.6 by train.

https://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/sites/...ansportation_statistics/html/table_02_01.html
https://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/sites/...ansportation_statistics/html/table_01_40.html

According to the below, adjusting for km vs miles, the UK equivalents are about 3 for car, 0.02 for air and "negligible" for rail.

https://www.statista.com/statistics...according-to-transport-in-the-united-kingdom/

 

[61653 HTAFC]

All this confusion over who is responsible for the track, coupled with the repeated slashing of public transportation budgets in the US, and with the suggestion that the rules on route knowledge over there might be less stringent than here in the UK, shows the logical conclusion of decades of under-investment and an ideologically driven drive* to cut regulations and oversight that borders on the pathological. We may complain about the amount of red tape involved in making any changes to operations or infrastructure here, but if the only options for running a railway were the US approach or the UK approach... well, I know which I'd choose.

None of that is of much use right now to those injured or bereaved by this apparently avoidable tragedy. Hollow as it sounds whenever anyone says this, my thoughts are with those affected. This includes the driver, whose (as it appears) error or lapse has wreaked such destruction. That's not a weight I'd wish on anyone.

*=as I understand it, the Democrats have been just as guilty of this as the Republicans over the past 30 years... but I digress.

 

[b0b]

In the US, the railroad companies are the owners of the infrastructure, with the notable exception of the Northeast Corridor high-speed line (and Metra in Chicago I believe owns some of their lines). The railroad companies are investing in their infrastructure, but as their business is freight, do not and do not have the motivation to maintain the lines for high speed passenger use.