Head-on collision in Amarillo, TX

Discussion related to BNSF operations. Official site: BNSF.COM

Moderator: Komachi

Re: Head-on collision in Amarillo, TX

Postby JayBee » Mon Jul 18, 2016 2:34 am

BNSF train ignored stop signal before deadly Texas Panhandle collision

A train failed to heed a stop signal before it barreled head-on into another freight train last month in the Texas Panhandle, killing three, according to a preliminary federal report released Thursday.

An eastbound BNSF Railway train failed to slow at a yellow warning signal on June 28 and then continued past a red stop signal before striking an oncoming BNSF train, inspectors for the National Transportation Safety Board said in the report.

The eastbound train, bound for Chicago, was supposed to stop and allow the Los Angeles-bound train to pass. It was traveling just over 60 mph when it passed the yellow signal, though trains are not supposed to travel any faster than 40 mph at a yellow signal so that they can stop in time at a red signal. The train was traveling about 65 mph when it passed the stop signal.

NTSB spokesman Terry Williams said it's not clear how far beyond the stop signal that the point of impact occurred.


Yes, the EB failed to react to the Advanced Approach, the Approach Signal, and the Stop signal. They also didn't react to the jolt when they split the East Siding switch. The speed passing the Approach signal was 62mph when it should have been 30 mph, and the speed passing the Stop Indication was 67 mph.

Whom ever the newspaper quoted or misunderstood the 40 mph restriction would have been for the Advanced Approach signal.
JayBee
 
Posts: 355
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 11:28 pm

Re: Head-on collision in Amarillo, TX

Postby scoostraw » Mon Jul 18, 2016 8:04 am

Let's say hypothetically that both crew members were completely incapacitated for some reason.

What role would the alerter on the lead locomotive take?
User avatar
scoostraw
 
Posts: 634
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2006 3:34 pm
Location: South of the moon. North of hell.

Re: Head-on collision in Amarillo, TX

Postby Gilbert B Norman » Mon Jul 18, 2016 9:09 am

The noted article is Associated Press bylined; circulated by the Dallas Morning News from which Mr. Smith linked such.

AP has been a reliable source for reporting of railroad industry affairs, but according to Mr. JayBee in this instance, they appear to be off mark. Their sole source appears to be the NTSB Preliminary Report. While they contacted the NTSB for further comment, the spokesman responded in mediaese, "no comment.
Gilbert B Norman
 
Posts: 12900
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 6:52 am
Location: Clarendon Hills, IL (BNSF Aurora Sub; MP 18.71)

Re: Head-on collision in Amarillo, TX

Postby ExCon90 » Mon Jul 18, 2016 2:25 pm

scoostraw wrote:Let's say hypothetically that both crew members were completely incapacitated for some reason.

What role would the alerter on the lead locomotive take?

Afaik, if nobody responded to the alerter within a defined number of seconds the train would have been stopped by a penalty application of the brakes--this could have happened at any point en route. I believe it's a variation of the dead-man principle except that instead of having to keep his foot on a pedal the engineer must acknowledge the periodic beeps emitted by the alerter. (I was just thinking that those intermittent beeps hour after hour would drive me up the wall, perhaps to the point that I might acknowledge reflexively whenever I heard the beep even if I was nodding off.)
ExCon90
 
Posts: 3468
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 1:22 pm

Re: Head-on collision in Amarillo, TX

Postby scoostraw » Mon Jul 18, 2016 5:08 pm

ExCon90 wrote:Afaik, if nobody responded to the alerter within a defined number of seconds the train would have been stopped by a penalty application of the brakes--this could have happened at any point en route.

That's my understanding as well. And AFAIK there is no simple way to defeat it.

So it SEEMS as if the engineer was in the seat and responding. I can understand an engineer zoning out and resetting the alarm as a reflex.

But then there is the second person in the cab. They would have to be oblivious to what was happening as well. It doesn't really add up.

There is a scenario that fits, but I don't even want to float that theory here..
User avatar
scoostraw
 
Posts: 634
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2006 3:34 pm
Location: South of the moon. North of hell.

Re: Head-on collision in Amarillo, TX

Postby Gilbert B Norman » Mon Jul 18, 2016 8:59 pm

Interesting points made immediately; now can we consider that any person can "zone"?

No way can I excuse the inactions of the EB C&E; that they cannot get sleep account their circadian clocks, they have no business being Operating Employees in any transportation service.

Some people simply cannot; I'm one of them (once when I was in the Air Force, they found me passed out. the NCOIC, an E-8 SMSGT, said "Normie, you'very worked your last grave; I need you fresh for duty", for he knew I wasn't one to "drink till I dropped").
Gilbert B Norman
 
Posts: 12900
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 6:52 am
Location: Clarendon Hills, IL (BNSF Aurora Sub; MP 18.71)

Re: Head-on collision in Amarillo, TX

Postby sd80mac » Tue Jul 19, 2016 2:09 pm

I talked to my buddy who was T&E about how is it possible for fast fall asleep right out of home terminal.

He said that the worst time are right at the beginning and nearing the completing the trip.

Any of you T&E had experienced similar - right at the beginning of the trip?
sd80mac
 
Posts: 1748
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 8:28 am
Location: Rochester, ny

Re: Head-on collision in Amarillo, TX

Postby JimBoylan » Tue Jul 19, 2016 2:53 pm

Has the missing crew person been found? Or, was he from the Eastbound train?
JimBoylan
 
Posts: 3114
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2004 2:33 pm

Re: Head-on collision in Amarillo, TX

Postby Z31SPL » Wed Jul 20, 2016 1:09 pm

Most likely "vaporized" in the ensueing blaze
Z31SPL
 
Posts: 71
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2015 10:44 am
Location: Kingston, NH

Re: Head-on collision in Amarillo, TX

Postby 10more years » Thu Jul 21, 2016 12:40 pm

It's hard to imagine what may or not have happened. I've got one conductor who barely speaks to me for the first ten miles of a trip because he knows that I'm "busy" doing things, getting organized, checking speed. That being said, sometimes you just get distracted. Sometimes (not very often), one of you is just "there". Eastbound train, maybe the sun got in his eyes. Maybe, he was looking at the Trip Optimizer, trip monitor, adjusting the AC. Lots of scenarios, and unfortunately, some of them are not very good. Are all of us on our game 100% of the time?
10more years
 
Posts: 175
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 8:32 pm
Location: Rocky Mount NC

Re: Head-on collision in Amarillo, TX

Postby John_Perkowski » Mon Jul 25, 2016 11:33 am

The search was called off weeks ago...

Read about it at the Lubbock Avalanche-Journal.
~John Perkowski: Moderator: General Discussion: Locomotives, Rolling Stock, and Equipment
Assistant Administrator: Railroad.net/forums
Please don't feed the spammers! If you see spam, please notify a Moderator
User avatar
John_Perkowski
 
Posts: 4475
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 5:12 pm
Location: Off the Q main near Parkville MO

Re: Head-on collision in Amarillo, TX

Postby John_Perkowski » Mon Jul 25, 2016 11:37 am

Houston Public Media has the NTSB Preliminary Report for your reading pleasure..

As noted above, it appears one train blew through a yellow aspect and a red aspect.
~John Perkowski: Moderator: General Discussion: Locomotives, Rolling Stock, and Equipment
Assistant Administrator: Railroad.net/forums
Please don't feed the spammers! If you see spam, please notify a Moderator
User avatar
John_Perkowski
 
Posts: 4475
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 5:12 pm
Location: Off the Q main near Parkville MO

Re: Head-on collision in Amarillo, TX

Postby Gilbert B Norman » Mon Jul 25, 2016 2:05 pm

John_Perkowski wrote:The search was called off weeks ago...

Read about it at the Lubbock Avalanche-Journal.


Colonel, could there be a Mad Men Dick Whitman/Don Draper scene playing out?

Jumps, survives, lays low, wife becomes a widow, collects both grief and insurance $$$, He starts new life South of the Border with hot running Senoritas?
Gilbert B Norman
 
Posts: 12900
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 6:52 am
Location: Clarendon Hills, IL (BNSF Aurora Sub; MP 18.71)

Re: Head-on collision in Amarillo, TX

Postby scoostraw » Mon Jul 25, 2016 4:20 pm

Well if you're going to speculate, why not a murder/suicide?

Wasn't one of the crew members of the eastbound a female? One offs the other, and then purposely runs the train past all signals until it meets the oncoming traffic.

The thing is, without an inward-facing cab camera it may be impossible to ever know what exactly happened.
User avatar
scoostraw
 
Posts: 634
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2006 3:34 pm
Location: South of the moon. North of hell.

Re: Head-on collision in Amarillo, TX

Postby sd80mac » Tue Jul 26, 2016 7:04 am

I would say that the female was on the Westbound. The westbound was in 35 mph plus at the collision. So the engineer has to jumped off when train was probably doing 45 mph or higher. He had to jump a lot earlier to not get crushed under containers. The female would had followed him. There would be no way she could jump without injuries and run for south at that train's speed. Landing on ballast with junks lying along the track bed is no fun.

She have a son and as most of any mother, they wouldn't abandon their kids.
sd80mac
 
Posts: 1748
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 8:28 am
Location: Rochester, ny

PreviousNext

Return to BNSF Railway (Burlington Northern Santa Fe)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest