OT...Amtrak Philly
- Thread starter phillinois
- Start date
Last night, I reenacted the accident on my model railroad at home. Conclusion: The engineer had been drinking.
Last edited:
Fault ? Liability..yes
I heard to day that he has 14 staples in his head. He lawyered up real fast in that he can't remember anything.
Right, lets just let them off the hook. How can anyone ever suggest that running a system where there aren't sufficient safe guards against running a train more than twice the safe speed. You have to be blind to suggest such. You telling me that doing that is OK? Wrong even a blind squirrel could fix this problem. At the least they could put three people in the decision cabin and perhaps two of them could stay awake.
Now the real issue here is whether there was some 2nd party involvement in this wreck. Reports are that other trains had something hit their windows in the same area and also the derailed plane had a questionable broken window in the captains cockpit. Also passenger reports of the same. I will reserve judgment on the cause of the accident until the NTSB issues it's report.
This wreck could have been the result of foul play from anything from vandals to terrorist shooting at cockpit windows.
If I were an Islamic terrorist this is something I would think of to do to create terror
I'm telling you that sometimes employees do stupid things that they've been taught not to do. I've been a one man company for 33 years and part of it is the fear of somebody I've trained right, who would decide to do what he's been taught not to do, putting my butt on chopping block. But I've been to seminars anyway. Usually they teach you that if you can document what you taught, that if the employee did the opposite of what you taught him, that it's on him, not on you.
You like blaming, don't you? Why should the company be on the hook? If the guy had been dangerous in the past and they ignored it, then you have a case.
I like the accountability I have now. If I screw up, it's always on me. But I've had required liability insurance for 33 years and never had a claim, knock on wood. That takes a little luck, on top of being careful. Amtrak surely has its faults. But an employee screw up isn't any more certainly the fault of the company he works for, than the screw up of a child is the fault of the parent.
You like blaming, don't you? Why should the company be on the hook? If the guy had been dangerous in the past and they ignored it, then you have a case.
I like the accountability I have now. If I screw up, it's always on me. But I've had required liability insurance for 33 years and never had a claim, knock on wood. That takes a little luck, on top of being careful. Amtrak surely has its faults. But an employee screw up isn't any more certainly the fault of the company he works for, than the screw up of a child is the fault of the parent.
I agree with Plaino here. Unless of course it can be proven that this type of activity was going on and the company knew about it and did nothing to prevent it. But if that can't be shown, then I have never agreed with a company bearing the brunt of financial responsibility when one of their employees does something stupid and irresponsible that violates company policy and established safety regulations and puts others lives at risk.
I'm right there with ya, BR. Unfortunately, the company has much deeper pockets and is a much easier target than the employee and/or his/her insurance company. See the German Wings tragedy.
I can't believe how some think. How many of these train wrecks have we had where it comes down to a single individual who dozes off, is drunk or does some other thing that results in a wreck putting passengers in real danger and in this last case a brutal death. We humans are sometimes way to hard headed to learn. This is especially true in this day and age. With the terrorist on the prowl and other issues people/companies in charge of these kinds of companies have to consider all the possibilities.
We just has an airliner where an employee, the Co-Captain used subterfuge to intentionally crash the airliner. In this case he spiked a drink causing the pilot to have to go take a pee. When he left the cabin was locked with only the lone pilot in the cabin and he crashed the plane. Some simple thought and the Airline could have easily found a way that would have prevented this crash. Just make sure that no single person is left locked in side the cabin. At a minimum when one of the pilots has to leave the cabin put two stewardesses in the cabin until the pilot returns to the cabin. This isn't brain surgery ... it is simple good planning. We are in a period where every precaution has to be taken.
In the case of these trains we seem to have a situation where the trains are left in the hands of a single person. With the speeds these trains are capable of and the potential for wrecks this seems to me to be an issue easy to solve.
Pure mechanical issues are always a risk not matter the technology. The human issues are pretty easily solvable.
Amtrak, needs to be killed with the trains turned over to the private sector. Government has no business being in the train business.
We just has an airliner where an employee, the Co-Captain used subterfuge to intentionally crash the airliner. In this case he spiked a drink causing the pilot to have to go take a pee. When he left the cabin was locked with only the lone pilot in the cabin and he crashed the plane. Some simple thought and the Airline could have easily found a way that would have prevented this crash. Just make sure that no single person is left locked in side the cabin. At a minimum when one of the pilots has to leave the cabin put two stewardesses in the cabin until the pilot returns to the cabin. This isn't brain surgery ... it is simple good planning. We are in a period where every precaution has to be taken.
In the case of these trains we seem to have a situation where the trains are left in the hands of a single person. With the speeds these trains are capable of and the potential for wrecks this seems to me to be an issue easy to solve.
Pure mechanical issues are always a risk not matter the technology. The human issues are pretty easily solvable.
Amtrak, needs to be killed with the trains turned over to the private sector. Government has no business being in the train business.
I see where you are coming from, but you are using 20/20 hindsight to pass judgment on things that you assume should have been easily predicted, avoided and solvable. Fact is, there will always be ways around security or defensive measures no matter how hard you try and think of every scenario or situation. That pilot who wanted to crash that plane and kill everyone, would have found a way to complete his mission, regardless of how many safeguards or measures you put in place to prevent it. You make a couple of suggestions that you think would have easily solved the problem, but what if the pilot in question had simply spiked the other pilots drink with something that rendered him unconscious?? How can anyone get into the cabin if it's locked? It's still "game over" for everyone on board.
Good one on using 20/20 hindsight. Just how many times do you have to do the same thing before you learn your lesson?
If you use your logic than we just continue to do the same ole things with the same old results. Does it really make sense to you to put one man in charge of a train capable of speeds in excess of 100 miles an hour with literally hundreds of lives at stake?
We don't know yet if this was terrorism, vandals or just a single employee mistake. Humans are prone to error. Then these tracks are prone to failure. You may be ok with risking the life of your loved ones on these trains, but I am not. I have been on those runs from DC to NYC and they never engendered the idea/feeling of being safe in me.
If we can't learn from our failures then we have failed. Having 20/20 hindsight is how we learn from the errors we make in life. What is there about that that is hard to understand?
Of course you learn from failures. But your entire premise of saying these things aren't brain surgery and easily solvable is about as flawed as it gets. Sure you can put in safeguards to prevent the LAST thing from happening, but there is no way to predict exactly what will happen the next time. Or the time after that. Or the time after that. It's a classic example in military terminology of "preparing to fight the last war."
How long have trains been operating in this country, or the world for that matter, with one man in charge? And how many times have things like this happened? It's incredibly rare that something like this has happened. But now all of a sudden it should be deemed flawed or impossible to have one man in charge of the train, even though it's been pretty damn effective for decades? At some point people need to take a step back, and realize that accidents do in fact happen and it's not a reason to jump to an emotional conclusion and start making wholesale changes out of panic. Because what happens when a train derails with 2 guys at the controls? Does that mean it should have been "brain surgery" or didn't make sense to only have 2 guys in charge?? Cuz I mean hell...it just happened with 2 guys at the controls of an airplane right?? Is 3 enough? What happens if it happens with 3 guys at the controls? Accidents will invariably happen regardless.
Now in the case of the pilot, I do agree with you that they definitely need to reevaluate procedures to account for some "copycat" wanting to do this in the future. But to say "it's not brain surgery" as if anyone should have seen something like this coming is just absurd. Sure they can put in procedures to account for what happened. But just like history has shown us, "fighting the last war", will simply help to prepare for or avoid the LAST thing that happened, and will do nothing against individuals in the future who will find other ways around security and procedures to do something similar again if they so have the desire and motivation to do it.
Brakemen and firemen were removed from the cabs in the 80's. On passenger trains, the conductor walks the train and is not always in the cab. The union wants to add another engineer to the cab. Probably a good idea, but it will come with a price tag.
Today's mainline trains run on precision ground continuous welded rails and precision wheel sets. They are as safe as ever. But there are still mechanical and human errors that happen. It will always be that way. The Amtrak engineer screwed up, whether knowingly or unknowingly. No need to blame an entire industry for the wreck. Wrecks happen in all modes of transportation. What they need to do is reintroduce the "dead man switch". The engineer must press a button every 30 seconds or the train goes into emergency stop.
Today's mainline trains run on precision ground continuous welded rails and precision wheel sets. They are as safe as ever. But there are still mechanical and human errors that happen. It will always be that way. The Amtrak engineer screwed up, whether knowingly or unknowingly. No need to blame an entire industry for the wreck. Wrecks happen in all modes of transportation. What they need to do is reintroduce the "dead man switch". The engineer must press a button every 30 seconds or the train goes into emergency stop.
That's some good info S22. So is the conductor and engineer basically the same thing? I definitely wasn't aware that at times they aren't even in the cabin and walking the train. But clearly that practice wouldn't be acceptable if it there was ever any doubt as the the safety of the trains operating/moving without them at the controls.
On freight trains, there are always a minimum of two people in the cab. Cabooses disappeared years ago. The conductor used to ride back there. The engineer and conductor are now together up front. The conductor keeps track of the paperwork, communications, and walks in the cold rain at 2:00am to find a broken air brake hose or broken coupler a mile to the rear. The job sucks. These guys get sprayed by skunks, get shot at, you name it. The engineer has a pretty good job. Both guys make BIG $$$.
On Amtrak passenger trains, the conductor checks for tickets and tells thugs to turn down the boom boxes. So he isn't always in the cab. That is what I've witnessed on cross country trains. It may be different in the NE were 100+ mph trains are common. I am not certain, but I think that current federal law requires a minimum of two in the cab now. But only one is an engineer.
On Amtrak passenger trains, the conductor checks for tickets and tells thugs to turn down the boom boxes. So he isn't always in the cab. That is what I've witnessed on cross country trains. It may be different in the NE were 100+ mph trains are common. I am not certain, but I think that current federal law requires a minimum of two in the cab now. But only one is an engineer.
Good information. On the price tag for the extra man at the helm ... my guess is that the expense of the last wreck will cost more than the cost of the extra man for many decades to come.
There are no guarantees in any of this. Accidents are part of our lives, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to prevent them by taking the necessary precautions.
March 26, 2015 -- Germanwings Flight 9525 co-pilot Andreas Lubitz deliberately crashed the plane, killing all 150 people on board.
Sometimes nefarious plans can not be prevented.
The guy would be criminally liable for the deaths. What else would there to be said? Do you happen to know their policy on texting or using cellphones while on the job? Just because you make something illegal or against policy does not mean it will prevent people from doing it. Even if there are 2 people at the controls, what do you do if both of them have cell phones and were texting? Or how about 3 people texting and there was still an accident?
Yep, I was driving once and a rock was thrown up into my windshield (and was cracked) by a truck that was in front of me. I had no choice but to hit the gas until I was going 140 MPH.
It was only because I ran out of gas that I didn't have an unfortunate incident.
It was only because I ran out of gas that I didn't have an unfortunate incident.
Last edited: