Amtrak train strikes backhoe, derails with 340-plus on board
Source: CNN
(CNN)An Amtrak passenger train derailed Sunday morning south of Philadelphia while en route from New York to Savannah, Georgia, the company said in a statement.
The train struck a backhoe that was on the tracks, Amtrak said.
About 341 passengers and seven crew members were on board. Amtrak said some of those on board were being treated for injuries but did not specify how many.
The company is suspended service between New York and Philadelphia.
Read more: http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/03/us/philadelphia-amtrak-derailment/index.html
metroins
(2,550 posts)Last edited Sun Apr 3, 2016, 10:57 AM - Edit history (1)
No reason for this to happen.
Waste of time, resources and injuries on a completely preventable incident.
That sounds intentional to me.
Looks like the two dead are construction workers.
rjsquirrel
(4,762 posts)That is quite a leap. Negligent and stupid and wasteful yes.
Who you're implying is an act of terrorism.
metroins
(2,550 posts)It sounds intentional if a backhoe was on the tracks.
It's not like a car stalled or a suicide.
It's my opinion and I'm entitled to it. We will see how it plays out but it's not common to have a 7 ton backhoe on train tracks.
rjsquirrel
(4,762 posts)Just haven't yet heard any reason to believe it's a zebra and not a horse whose hooves I hear.
Shit getting left on tracks accidentally (negligently by definition) happens all the time. People intentionally causing derailments by doing that happens rarely.
metroins
(2,550 posts)I don't see backhoes on train tracks very often.
Looks like the dead 2 were construction workers on the backhoe.
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,027 posts)You think backhoes never stall?
You think backhoes never cross tracks?
metroins
(2,550 posts)Looks like the dead 2 were construction workers on backhoe.
Chan790
(20,176 posts)and those of us that know something about trains, like that backhoes (and other heavy machinery) are on and near tracks frequently because tracks require near-constant maintenance (which is nearly impossible to do without heavy machinery when you're talking about 4T 120' rail-segment and 95lb. concrete cross-ties), especially on major corridors like Amtrak's Northeast Regional Lines...are entitled to think maybe your opinion is ill-informed.
There is a not-fine line between failure of safety procedures and acts of intent.
metroins
(2,550 posts)I know backhoes. I worked and operated them for 4 years roughly 6 years ago.
Backhoes don't stall once their started unless under stress.
But honestly, this conversation doesn't matter. I enjoy speculating, I enjoy trying to predict and my opinion doesn't matter.
So I hope you have a good night, sometimes I'm wrong. I don't mind admitting it, I posted what I thought at the time.
Brickbat
(19,339 posts)cstanleytech
(26,306 posts)rjsquirrel
(4,762 posts)It was an Amtrak maintenance crew operating the backhoe.
Once again proving the value of fevered speculation after a disaster.
metroins
(2,550 posts)I believe in speculation if there's no consequences.
I'm lying in my bed 1800 miles away.
My opinion literally does not matter, but I'm free to put it out there.
brooklynite
(94,665 posts)Officials say Amtrak Train 89, operating from New York to Savannah, Ga., struck a backhoe that was on the tracks at approximately 7:53 a.m. Sunday morning near Booth St. in Chester, causing the lead engine of the train to derail.
6 ABC and others are reporting that two have died as a result of the incident, but Amtrak has only confirmed that some passengers are being treated for injuries.
Read more at http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/real-time/2-reported-dead-after-Amtrak-train-derails-in-Chester.html
onehandle
(51,122 posts)My guess is that it was an improperly trained operator running the backhoe.
90% of the construction workers here seem to be from New Jersey, so I would put some of the blame on Christie's deregulation of everything. But also, Philly needs to require certifications, increase construction fees, and tax the fuck out of developers.
Philly is nothing but closed sidewalks and gaping holes in the ground.
But I digress...
Prayers for the people on the train and their families. I've been on that train many times. It could have been us.
FUND AMTRAK, REPUBLICANS!
rjsquirrel
(4,762 posts)It wa an Amtrak maintenance crew.
rickford66
(5,526 posts)I've seen people trying to beat the train as have many other people. I've also wondered why so many vehicles stall on the tracks. Do the drivers get nervous, stall the vehicle and maybe flood it?
whistler162
(11,155 posts)Buffalo to NYC near where I live just the other week. He lost!
cstanleytech
(26,306 posts)was there and the drivers were simply unable to get it off the tracks in time.
rickford66
(5,526 posts)That was the question I out out there.
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)Which makes it all the more confusing...
brooklynite
(94,665 posts)Eugene
(61,928 posts)Source: Reuters
Source: Reuters - Mon, 4 Apr 2016 14:50 GMT
Author: Reuters
(Adds CNN report that workers were on the wrong track)
By Barbara Goldberg
NEW YORK, April 4 (Reuters) - Maintenance workers were mistakenly on the wrong track when an Amtrak passenger train struck a large piece of railway equipment on Sunday near Philadelphia and killed two people, according to CNN.
The network cited an unnamed source in reporting that the train hit the crew after a "colossal" error left them on an active track.
Investigators on Monday from the National Transportation Safety Board were analyzing an event data recorder and video recordings recovered after the front of the train went off the tracks in Chester, Pennsylvania, about 15 miles (25 km) southwest of Philadelphia.
[font size=1]-snip-[/font]
Read more: http://news.trust.org/item/20160404145354-pjnde
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)I mean a very low voltage like my land line has where old phone rings even if power is off?
Aerows
(39,961 posts)quite a distance to stop a train. You have a good idea, though, and if prevents even one of these collisions it is worth looking into.
whistler162
(11,155 posts)http://cs.trains.com/trn/f/111/t/72641.aspx
"A full service application will stop a loaded coal train going 50mph on flat ground in about 1.5 miles; an emergency application will stop it in about half of that distance.
Factors affecting the stopping distance are: temperature, grade (uphill or downhill), dynamic brakes (or the lack thereof), ice/snow accumulated in brake rigging, and to a lesser extent the condition of the rail.
A coal train (or any unit train) can usually be put directly into emergency without much risk of derailment due to all the freight cars are of equal length and weight. A manifest train with mixed loads and empties distributed at random needs much more care on how quickly the brakes are applied. A poorly blocked train (empties in front / loads on the rear) require muck more delicate applications of brakes (either dynamic or air) due to the likelyhood of undesireable slack action.
A suburban train can stop (under ideal conditions) from 70mph in about 1/2 mile."
Just a couple of samples.
Aerows
(39,961 posts)They are so dang heavy and have so much built up momentum, that they need quite a distance (way more than visibility) to stop. I wouldn't be surprised that despite the advances made in hydraulic braking systems that those figures are generous.
And as you illuminated, poor loading balance would most certainly make some configurations extremely dangerous.
Aerows
(39,961 posts)"Look at it this way, a loaded coal train can weigh in excess of 15,000 tons. 15,000 tons moving at 50 MPH is alot of energy to arrest. So 2 1/2 miles is not out of line."
I don't doubt that for a second. You aren't stopping a F-150 or even a fully loaded tractor trailer. You are stopping several magnitudes more weight.
Nac Mac Feegle
(971 posts)The 'legend' was that a fully loaded coal train, a mile long, going 60mph, could "Dynamite" (full emergency stop, named for the explosive indicator charges that were put on the rail) in it' own length (one mile). However, this would destroy all the brake pads, put flat spots on all the wheels that would render them unusable, and convert the crew in the way-car (caboose) into strawberry jam on the front wall. This was before the technology advanced that rendered the way-car (caboose) unnecessary.
It was considered something that was to be strictly avoided, unless ABSOLUTELY necessary.
There is a HELL of a lot of weight, going at a sizable speed. That is a &*($ of a lot of energy that has to go somewhere. It ain't gonna be pretty.