There was a bad derailment of a Metro North train near the Spuyten Duyvil station in the Bronx, NYC. It was a Hudson Line train headed south out of Poughkeepsie, NY, bound for Grand Central Station. According to the reporting, the accident happened around 7:20 this morning, so hopefully the train wasn't too crowded, but preliminary reports put 4 people dead and over 60 injured, 11-12 very seriously. Emergency worker access to the derailed cars seems tricky, as they stopped right near the water on a marshy slope. The news just reported that Metro North Hudson Line service is suspended and Amtrak service between Albany and YC is disrupted--i.e., Empire Service, Adirondack, Maple Leaf, Ethan Allen, and NY branch of the Lakeshore Ltd. From the aerial photos it looks like the accident happened just after the Metro North and Amtrak lines split, as the Metro North train was taking that curve. Reports are ongoing on all NYC local channels, NY newspaper websites, etc.
I am deeply saddened by this terrible tragedy on this beautiful train line on which I often travel, and my thoughts go out to the families of all the victims.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
The Times has an article posted at their site regarding this serious incident:
Firing up the computer about a half hour ago was my first knowledge of such; there was of course no reports during the 5AM CT CBS Radio News
Posted by Ocala Mike (Member # 4657) on :
Two things come to mind right offhand:
1. Train was almost certainly traveling too fast for that treacherous curve. Whether the brakes failed or a case of human error will come out in the investigation.
2. If I'm on a train that "loses contact" with the rails for whatever reason, I really don't want it to be in "push" mode when it happens. The engine obviously keeps going to plow into the cars already on the ground. I like my engines up front!
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
Mike, you like; but the fact remains that passenger railroading is quite centered around bidirectional push-pull. While Amtrak has tried yet limited such to the 600's, Keystone, in the Corridor, it is prevalent elsewhere about the System.
Unlike other forums about the web, we are mature enough to accept that the NTSB has a job to do and that such will take them the better part of a year. Hard as it may be to avoid speculation (tune into RRNET or Trainorders for all of that), let's wait for the NTSB to release their final report.
Posted by sojourner (Member # 3134) on :
Just an update: Amtrak service is restored, albeit with some delays as trains go slowly near the affected area.
I believe Metro North is going to have buses from some Hudson Line stations to/from the Harlem Line.
News is saying NTSB is going to have report in a week to ten days, though I suppose that won't be final report. Still, they want to determine asap if something needs fixin
Posted by Geoff Mayo (Member # 153) on :
Sojourner, the initial report usually just states the incontrovertible facts as recorded. They might or might not list possible causes or investigation focus areas at this stage.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
While watching the news reports of this accident, I noticed that one of the derailed cars (might have been the cab car, but not sure) had the logo "STATE OF CONNECTICUT" on it. I'm not that familiar with Metro North operations; is the rolling stock for the Hudson Line, Harlem Line, and New Haven Line all interchangable? I didn't think that would work.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
Mike, the locomotive hauled MNR cars are freely used on all three, Hudson, Harlem, New Haven lines as needed. The cars that Connecticut has contributed are liveried with 'New Haven Railroad Orange', as are their P-32 locomotives.
Posted by Ocala Mike (Member # 4657) on :
OK; got it. The "locomotive hauled" cars being the key. Obviously, the New Haven lines electrics wouldn't be interchangable.
Posted by Henry Kisor (Member # 4776) on :
The NTSB has checked in with a preliminary report:
82 in a 30; WTF? Unless it's a runaway train, this does not look good for the crew, sorry.
Posted by palmland (Member # 4344) on :
Wow, 82mph going into the curve with a 30mph speed restriction. Given that the speed limit prior to the curve was 70mph leaves little doubt that speed was the immediate cause. But, of course, the real question is what's the cause for the excessive speed. Suspect the NTSB is months away from determining that.
Posted by Jerome Nicholson (Member # 3116) on :
If the train's brakes had failed as an early report said the engineer claimed, wouldn't he have reported that to the dispatcher well before rounding the curve? Especially while he was doing 82 in a 70 zone just before?
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
From reviewing material posted at other sites, especially such posted by a retired Locomotive Engineer who I know face to face and has been Rules Qualified over that line, it appears that the train control system provided for capacity to stop a train if a Restricting or Stop Signal were displayed. There is however no provision to stop a train operating at excessive speed. The signal showed Clear and hence the existing system was not called upon to stop the train. The 'outcry' for Positive Train Control as mandated under RSIA '08 will only become louder. Here are related thoughts of mine:
So far as the incident itself, let us be thankful that, unlike Megantic, there was no fire at the scene and that all cars remained on dry land. In short, the evidence is all there - and, while by no means inferring that any other sovereign investigative agency such as the Canadian agency investigating Megantic, or the French agency that investigated AF 447, is a bunch of Mayberrys, the NTSB is the 'best in the business'. I can only suggest we avoid speculation here to the fullest extent possible - too much is riding on a thorough investigation by the professionals.
Posted by Ocala Mike (Member # 4657) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jerome Nicholson:
If the train's brakes had failed as an early report said the engineer claimed, wouldn't he have reported that to the dispatcher well before rounding the curve? Especially while he was doing 82 in a 70 zone just before?
Not if the engineer was asleep at the wheel. There are reports circulating that he made statements to that effect to the first responders.
The caveat to not jump to conclusions and assign blame too quickly notwithstanding, my initial thought was exactly that somebody was asleep at the switch. A real tragedy, because this guy had an exemplary record.
Posted by Geoff Mayo (Member # 153) on :
The initial findings also stated that the throttle was eased off 6 seconds before the train came to a stand, and the brakes were applied 5 seconds before coming to a stand. It doesn't make a distinction between "commanded" and "actioned" in reference to the brakes though - in other words, are they stating the brake lever position (commanded) or the brake pipe pressure (actioned)?
Sadly the collection of facts do point to a very small number of possibilities.
Posted by Geoff Mayo (Member # 153) on :
Now "reports" supposedly from those in the know that the engineer has admitted to being not entirely cognitive. Again, we shouldn't jump to conclusions: Eurostar train windshields through the Channel Tunnel had to be carefully designed to avoid a particular speed lulling drivers into a trance from the rhythmic tunnel ring segments.
Posted by Jerome Nicholson (Member # 3116) on :
Years ago, locomotives (and I guess cab - control cars, too), had a "dead man's switch" that stopped the train if the engineer became incapacitated. That was subject to tampering, and railroads put in a more elaborate system in which the engineer had to go through a sequence of moves to keep the train going. Does Metro - North not have anything like that?
Posted by Ocala Mike (Member # 4657) on :
The NTSB spokesman stated in yesterday's news briefing that the cab car was equipped with a "dead man's switch," but not an "alerter." Presumably, the engineer "zoned out" or whatever with his foot squarely ON the switch, while the train was proceeding at 82 MPH.
Posted by palmland (Member # 4344) on :
Ah, the deadman's switch. As a 9 year old I remember being invited into the cab of an F-7 for a brief ride on a freight train departing a yard on the L&N. I was barely tall enough to keep my foot on the peddle (the switch was a pedal on the floor then) and look out the window. I was alternately thrilled and terrified that my foot would slip off the pedal. The freight then stopped to let us off and had a hard time getting going on the grade out of town. Imagine that happening today.
Posted by Iron Mountain (Member # 12411) on :
In reference to the Metro North train wreck the "National Corridors Initiative" news letter today had an interesting commentary on the wreck and PTC. The thrust of the article was that the feds mandating PTC was not a cost effective expenditure and increased safety could be had for much less money. The demise of the SWC may be a victim of the PTC mandate.
Posted by Geoff Mayo (Member # 153) on :
Flashing lights by the rails to keep engineers awake! The mind boggles.