Join the discussion on the following article:
Derailed train accelerated toward curve; police obtain engineer’s phone records
The engineer had his profile picture removed from his Facebook account a few hours after the accident. I wonder why that was so important to do after the accident?
It’s sounding more and more to me like a software glitch. Mass media seem to asume the locomotive has only a throttle and a brake.
The engineer didn’t remove his profile picture. He changed it to a black square, as some do in support of victims of a tragedy. The SEPTA train in front of 188 was “hit by foreign projectiles” in the area just prior to the crash. It would not surprise me at all if the two events are, in fact, related.
Kenneth, A software glitch was the first answer that came to mind after this accident, realizing the advanced technology that Siemens used on this new engine. . The first thing I would have said to questioners, after the accident, was the engine RAN AWAY, not the silence that his union rep probably advised him.
If the claim is made that there was some sort of malfunction: software, mechanical, et.al., then that will increase the call for inward facing cameras with sound recording.
Whats the protocol? Talk to police or not? Talk to employer to get permisión to talk to police? my employer teaches none of that!
The phone, text records will be instrumental. A software glitch will be found out. The question that still needs to be answered is the fact that 65 seconds is a significant amount of time to address a problem unless their is also a significant distraction.
.
Think about having your car on cruise control going down a freeway. Then the car suddenly starts to accelerate and continues to accelerate for 61 seconds. The analogy might not be perfect, but a focused driver will most likely act in an immediate fashion where as a distracted driver might find himself ramming the car in front by the time he or she realizes what is going on. That is my impression from reading this story.
TE, JS and KA,
Here are some theories involving your comments:
Some people may have suggested taking down the image in self-defense. Here, in “Cally,” there’s a law prohibiting divulging information such as engineer’s ID or image, valued by gun-totin’ 'venge full friends and family.
JS no surprise if the same A…H… was keeping on with his fun and games, but I doubt causative.factors for the derailment exist.
KA, I recollect that the engine is a virtual duplicate of a time-proven very successful engine widely used internationally
.Glitch, possible, anything is.
And there is the ominous specter of the “Union rep” lurking…
TE,
I don’t know anything about the locomotive’s software so can’t say if there is even a possibility of a glitch causing the acceleration prior. I have seen an analysis of the Toyota engine control software that shows that a glitch could very well cause unintended acceleration.
Given the report of trains being hit by projectiles in the area, one wonders if one went through the window, stunned the engineer, causing him to inadvertently advance the throttle, then put the train into emergency when he got his wits back. Alternatively, a projectile damaged the window but didn’t break it, distracting him while he assessed whether the damage was critical. But that does not explain the throttle advance, unless it was bumped, which one would think he would notice.
TE of CA, I don’t think 65 seconds is necessarily the time period to be considered. The curve is actually “rated” I understand, for 80 mph, but “limited” to 50. Consider that maybe the “norm” for actually taking the curve is , say, 65. I would not be at all surprised if the norm is to maintain 70-80 to near the curve, slow to 65 thru the curve and accelerate back to 70 or 80 as you exit the curve. Nice and smooth- every time.
So at 75 (?) seconds before the curve was “expected”, the engineer accelerates a bit, planning to get to 75 and then backing off down to 65 as he nears the curve. But when he tries to back off at 75. (now 55 seconds left on the data recorder) a glitch occurs (or a projectile hits). Assuming it’s a glitch, and he has never seen or heard of such before, it takes 5 seconds before he even realizes it’s not backing off. “what the heck?” Now he’s going 80 at 43 sec left on recorder. He applies the normal brake and resets the throttle and tries to back it down again, (I don’t really know what controls are involved, just trying to picture the scene). 12 sec later we’re going 90 and he knows that is too fast for an 80 MPH rated curve. You don’t want to use the emergency if it can be avoided. One more try at the normal controls (but at this faster speed the curve is approaching more quickly) . No go, so now 15 secs later gotta hit the Emergency. But we’re going 100. There’s the curve. Hit the E brake. Too late! Just 10 sec (?) left on the data recorder and we’re going 106. That was about 40 seconds from first hint of a problem until emergency deploy. And maybe 30 seconds from “Real realization” of a problem and just 20 seconds of panic.
I’m betting that this is about what happened. If instead of a glitch it was a projectile that caused the problem I can imagine the same speed scenario but with distraction or even temporary impairment over the same short time span.
And note that with the speed scenario I describe, a projectile would not have to cause the engineer to “inadvertently advance” the throttle. It only had to cause him to “inadvertently delay retarding” the throttle.