Train Crash in Washington

[bookworm_020]

I surprised that this hasn't been posted earlier. 6 confirmed dead, with that to rise

http://www.smh.com.au/world/two-subway-trains-collide-in-washington-dc-peakhour-smash-20090623-cubj.html

[OneToughHerring]

At least nine dead now.

[AVGWarhawk]

I heard about this on the way to work this morning. I will be hearing a lot more as this accident occured about 30 miles from my house.

[Schroeder]

Damn it.:nope:

[SteamWake]

It seems that one of the trrains involved was an 'older' model and dident have recorders installed.

Also the system was supposed to be running in automated mode. Looks like the ABS failed (Automatic Braking System) if that 'older' model even had that system installed.

[Max2147]

Official death toll is now 7.

I'm pretty sure I was actually riding Metro when it happened. I rode the Red Line yesterday morning (albiet in a completely different part of town), but I decided to take Blue/Orange home. When I was walking out of the station I heard announcements about all sorts of stuff happening on the Red Line.

From the reports here in DC it sounds like the train was under automated control at the time. The only thing the driver does is close the doors at the station.

Both trains stopped in the middle of the track, with the following train well behind. This is fairly normal on the Metro system. But then for some reason, the following train started moving again while the leading train was still stopped.

At that point the driver could have prevented the accident by applying the emergency brakes. There was a similar incident a couple of years ago where two drivers prevented a collision by applying the emergency brakes after the automated control system failed. That was a huge relief, since it happened in a tunnel under the Potomac River.

In this case, the driver clearly failed to apply the brakes until it was too late or failed to apply them completely. That means that the driver was suicidal, incapacitated, distracted, or for some reason failed to see the train ahead.

Looking at this photo, the latter might be possible, even though the accident happened above ground on a clear day: http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/photo/2009/06/22/PH2009062202697.jpg

Due to the curve, the bridge, the shadows caused by the bridge, and the chain link fence, the stationary leading train might not have been visible to the driver of the following train until it was too late.

It's also possible that the driver simply "zoned out" because she didn't have anything to do while the train was under manual control. In that state she might not have seen the train in front or reacted as quickly as she would have if she had been paying attention.

As far as the train model, I'm not sure if there's a major difference in safety features. I know Metro regularly refurbishes their old cars to bring them up to newer standards. However, the earliest trains (including the following train in yesterday's accident) have shown a tendency to "telescope" in accidents, with the body shell separating from the chassis. It looks like that happened yesterday too, which probably made the number of fatalities higher.

[Oberon]

Terrible accident, reminds me a little of Clapham Junction, that was faulty signalling. :nope: Terrible stuff.

[SteamWake]

In this case, the driver clearly failed to apply the brakes until it was too late or failed to apply them completely. That means that the driver was suicidal, incapacitated, distracted, or for some reason failed to see the train ahead..

Distracted... Id put money on it. Ill be a cell phone / blackberry was involved.

Which brings up a question I wanted to ask. I know the system is 'automated' but are there not signals or warning buzzers installed?

[Jimbuna]

Terrible accident, reminds me a little of Clapham Junction, that was faulty signalling. :nope: Terrible stuff.

That's what I was thinking :hmmm:

[SteamWake]

Dont deny Steamwakes Instincts :rotfl:


National Transportation Safety Board member Debbie Hersman said all "perishable data" has been collected in the first phase of the investigation and that the agency will now begin looking at such documents as cell-phone records, which includes accounts of text messages.
She said the agency has recently investigated two crashed in which a train operator was distracted when using a portable communication device -- including a May 8 incident in Boston in which 20 trolly passengers were injured.


http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jun/23/metro-train-crash-investigators-focusing-sensors/

[Max2147]

It's pretty clear that there were two separate failures. First, the automation failure that caused the train to stop moving, and the human failure that prevented it from stopping.

Unfortunately, most of the public scrutiny will be focused on the latter, even though the former is probably more serious.

[bookworm_020]

All the trains here in Sydney have dataloggers (black boxes) to record all speeds and actions of the drivers. The trains aren't automated, as the driver has full control at all times (well that is the theory!).

Signallers can hold a train at a red light or call them through to the next signal. But there is always one signal between trains. If you pass a signal at stop, two things happen, an alarm goes off at train headquarters, and the train's brakes get tripped and apply automaticly. If you don't have authority to pass the signal, the driver can expect to be hauled over the coals and even fired.

There has been multiply failures in this accident. To just blame the driver is a poor man's way of hidding the truth. After a couple of bad crashes here in Sydney alot of leasons were learned, but some of them were slow to be acted upon, which caused futher problems.

I feel sorry for the family of the driver who died, and the one who lived. I'm a trainee driver here in Sydney and can only guess how they would be feeling.

[SteamWake]

All the trains here in Sydney have dataloggers (black boxes) to record all speeds and actions of the drivers. The trains aren't automated, as the driver has full control at all times (well that is the theory!).

Signallers can hold a train at a red light or call them through to the next signal. But there is always one signal between trains. If you pass a signal at stop, two things happen, an alarm goes off at train headquarters, and the train's brakes get tripped and apply automaticly. If you don't have authority to pass the signal, the driver can expect to be hauled over the coals and even fired.

There has been multiply failures in this accident. To just blame the driver is a poor man's way of hidding the truth. After a couple of bad crashes here in Sydney alot of leasons were learned, but some of them were slow to be acted upon, which caused futher problems.

I feel sorry for the family of the driver who died, and the one who lived. I'm a trainee driver here in Sydney and can only guess how they would be feeling.

These trains are supposed to have all that except that one of these were 'older' models and did not have the data loggers installed. For whatever reason the ABS failed.

[Max2147]

The driver on the Red Line train engaged the emergency brakes: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/23/AR2009062300653.html

The NTSB said there was evidence on the tracks that the brakes had indeed been used, so it looks like it was just too late. Given the issues I mentioned before that would have obstructed the driver's vision (curve, bridge, shadows, chain link fence), it's not really surprising.

A lot of Metro's dirty laundry is also coming out for everybody to see. The NTSB has been on Metro's case a lot over safety issues, but Metro doesn't have a dedicated funding source, so they don't have the money to implement changes.

[SteamWake]

The driver on the Red Line train engaged the emergency brakes: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/23/AR2009062300653.html

The NTSB said there was evidence on the tracks that the brakes had indeed been used, so it looks like it was just too late. Given the issues I mentioned before that would have obstructed the driver's vision (curve, bridge, shadows, chain link fence), it's not really surprising.

A lot of Metro's dirty laundry is also coming out for everybody to see. The NTSB has been on Metro's case a lot over safety issues, but Metro doesn't have a dedicated funding source, so they don't have the money to implement changes.

Again are there no signals either trackside or in cab? In a train if you have to wait till you 'see' an obsticle its already too late.

[Max2147]

I don't know how Metro signaling works. They run on dedicated tracks, so it could be very different than what you find on a normal train line.

The local media have not mentioned any system like the one bookworm described, so I suspect it doesn't exist.

From the article I posted: "Metro's automated system is built around electronic relays on the trains and buried along the track that allow onboard computers to control speeds and stop trains from getting too close to one another."

I'm not sure if that system is in addition to or in lieu of traditional signaling.

[bookworm_020]

I don't know how Metro signaling works. They run on dedicated tracks, so it could be very different than what you find on a normal train line.

I would be surprised to find that much of a difference if there are drivers involved, With the couple of automatic systems I know of, they still have visual signals next to the track, regardless of any warning system on the train.


From the article I posted: "Metro's automated system is built around electronic relays on the trains and buried along the track that allow onboard computers to control speeds and stop trains from getting too close to one another."

I'm not sure if that system is in addition to or in lieu of traditional signaling.

Sounds like in addition to traditional signaling.

These trains are supposed to have all that except that one of these were 'older' models and did not have the data loggers installed. For whatever reason the ABS failed.

Same thing happened here with the waterfall accident. They had been installed but were still been tested and could be switched off, and many had been. (can't be done now!)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterfall_rail_accident

I know form some of the drivers and guards who had worked with this set G7(train) that it had a bad reputation. It would apply power despite brake applications and dropping the dead man's handle/foot peddle.

[SteamWake]

Track Sensors Fail Tests During Investigation of D.C. Train Crash


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,529067,00.html

Begs the question how long have they been in disrepair and why wasent it noticed before?

[Max2147]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,529067,00.html

Begs the question how long have they been in disrepair and why wasent it noticed before?
No money, wrong people.

Metro has no dedicated funding source. They have to go begging to DC, MD, VA, and the federal government every year for a new bag of money. Besides revenue from tickets, they don't have any guaranteed funding beyond one year.

On top of that, the money that Metro does get is badly used. Big expansions and highly-visible projects get a lot more attention (and thus more money) from those who fund Metro, so those get priority instead of ho-hum issues like maintenance and updating obsolete systems. The result is obsolete equipment and deferred maintenance.

Also, the people who run Metro are elected officials, not transportation experts. They really don't know how to run a mass transit system. Worse, they (like most elected officials) bristle at criticism. That's very bad when it's the NTSB making the criticisms and recommendations.

[bookworm_020]

From the sounds of what you said, Max2147, I do hope that a guaranteed funding stream is one of the recommendations that the NTSB make in there findings.

It's a great thing to build it, but it needs maintenance. It may not get votes for you, but it won't loose any by avoiding having things go wrong!

[SteamWake]

From the sounds of what you said, Max2147, I do hope that a guaranteed funding stream is one of the recommendations that the NTSB make in there findings.

It's a great thing to build it, but it needs maintenance. It may not get votes for you, but it won't loose any by avoiding having things go wrong!

Yup more taxes for an already failing system ... perfect ;)

Can you say Amtrack?

[Max2147]

Yup more taxes for an already failing system ... perfect ;)

Can you say Amtrack?
What would you rather do, shut it down? That's the only other option. The current state of affairs will become unsafe fairly soon.

DC NEEDS Metro. The streets are clogged past capacity, and there isn't room to build any more. Metro is an integral part of the city's transit system. It's also vital to the federal government, since lots of government employees ride it to work. So it's natural that the federal government should pay to keep it running.

Every other public transportation system has a dedicated funding system, usually from the state or city level. Metro doesn't have a state to turn to, and the city of DC doesn't have the money, largely because most of the city's prime real estate doesn't bring in any tax money (the federal government doesn't pay taxes to the District).

Should the money be accompanied by changes in how Metro is run? Absolutely. But the money needs to come.

Also, Amtrak is successful on a regional level. The NE Corridor is quite profitable on its own, and it's probably the best form of intercity transport in the northeast. From door to door it's faster than flying or driving. The same goes for other regional networks.

If Congress would give Amtrak the money to build dedicated tracks with its own right of way, the system will be very successful. Congress already builds and maintains roads for the trucking/bus industry, so why shouldn't they build railroads for Amtrak?

Amtrak's losses come from its long-distance routes. The government money basically subsidizes those routes and those routes alone. Congress makes Amtrak keep them because they provide services to a lot of small communities in the middle of nowhere. So in effect, they're basically just a railroad version of the Essential Air Service program, where the federal government subsidizes airlines who provide services to small cities that can't sustain profitable air service.

Every form of transportation in the US, be it rail, sea, road, or air relies on money from the federal government. So why do people only complain about the money rail gets?

[bookworm_020]

Yup more taxes for an already failing system ... perfect ;)

Can you say Amtrack?

If structured well and open and accountable practices are used it won't be too bad. It doesn't need to be a big increase, just a guaranteed amount so they know what they have to work with and what needs to be done.

It's hard to live pay check to pay check if you don't know if your getting one or getting what you have been promised.