Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Feds Order Amtrak To Turn On System That Would've Prevented Crash

Posted by samzenpus on from the switch-it-on dept.

McGruber writes: Last Tuesday evening, northbound Amtrak Northeast Regional train No. 188 derailed on a curve in Philadelphia, killing eight passengers. The train was traveling in excess of 100 mph, while the curve had a passenger-train speed limit of 50 mph. In response, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) is issuing formal emergency orders that will require Amtrak to make sure automatic train control systems work Northbound through Philadelphia at and near the site of the derailment. The FRA is also requiring that Amtrak assess the risk of all curves along the NEC and increase the amount and frequency of speed limit signs along the railroad. FRA's emergency order is newsworthy because Amtrak's existing signal system could have been configured to prevent a train from exceeding speed limits, according to the Wall Street Journal.

7 of 393 comments (clear)

  1. and dog eats tail by nimbius · · Score: 3, Interesting

    TL;DR: Federal oversight agency orders federal railroad system to implement safety system identified by federal investigators to have been a mitigating factor in this collision, after federal lawmakers gut funding for federal rail line.

    We care about this not because of the horrific loss of life or because of the ramifications of revealing the US to be a sinking ship of credit downgrades and crumbling infrastructure. We care about this accident because federal state and local lawmakers both for and against support of a public rail system dodged a bullet because they use that train regularly. the Amtrak stretch that collapsed under the burden of bureaucratic fasting could have been carrying a senator from his cloistered mcmansion to his cloistered chamber in Washington DC. That fact alone will see that this lapse in judgement is never again to be repeated. Until it is, and in which case the next incident of mass fatality due to blind ignorance and willful endangerment will be judged according to its plutocratic impact.

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
    1. Re:and dog eats tail by Shakrai · · Score: 5, Interesting

      This headline is misleading. We don't yet know what caused the crash, so it's a leap to say PTC could have prevented it. We do know that the train was traveling at a high rate of speed but not the reasons why it was doing that. If it was a systems failure then it's entirely possible that PTC would have been irrelevant. This is just like the rush to judgment against the engineer, who everyone was ready to lynch after the accident; all we know for sure about him at this juncture is his cell phone was turned off and his drug/alcohol test came back clean.

      Do some reading about PTC when you have a few minutes; like most Federal mandates it was:

      1) Unfunded.
      2) Ignored existing technology that could do the job nearly as well for a fraction of the cost.
      3) Ineffective, in that there have only been two train accounts in the last 20 years (three if this one is confirmed) that it would have prevented.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    2. Re:and dog eats tail by FranTaylor · · Score: 3, Interesting

      yeah how about that, the train passes through the largest city in the state, and it stops there. imagine that, how unusual

  2. No absolute speed governor? by swb · · Score: 1, Interesting

    The news reports all say the train was traveling over 100 MPH when it hit the curve.

    I'm not a train guy, but what's the maximum speed for that entire line? For some reason I'm thinking that line isn't ever supposed to hit that kind of speed and it makes me wonder why those engines don't have a speed governor that keeps the train from ever exceeding the maximum speed allowable across the entire route.

    I'd also think that such a governor should be tied to GPS to determine speed and if it can do that, it could use position to determine the maximum speed for wherever it is.

  3. Re:No self driving trains? by bluegutang · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Self-driving trains exist. Vancouver's subway is self-driving. But installing the self-driving signalling system on existing rail lines is expensive. And unions oppose anything that will decrease the number of railway workers. Since a single union has a monopoly on transit work in each city, they have immense power and get essentially anything that they want.

  4. Re:No self driving trains? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Unions should fight this, because technology obviously decreases the amount of work people can do, but there's no equivalent political or social drive to reduce the amount of money you need.

  5. Re:No self driving trains? by volmtech · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Who in America does not benefit from roads? Are not public schools subsidized by the childless? Oil is subsidized, you mean not subject to confiscatory taxes, and again, who does not benefit from oil?